PDA

View Full Version : ravens vs. patriots


Pages : [1] 2

tony hipchest
10-04-2009, 12:37 PM
ngata swatted at an attempted pass and grazed toms helmet on the swing and was penalized 15 yds for roughing. biggest puss call ever.

in other news, brady is suprizingly wearing LESS pink today.

fansince'76
10-04-2009, 12:45 PM
The Pats* getting bailed out by the refs on 3rd and long? Say it ain't so! :coffee:

MACH1
10-04-2009, 12:46 PM
ngata swatted at an attempted pass and grazed toms helmet on the swing and was penalized 15 yds for roughing. biggest puss call ever.

in other news, brady is suprizingly wearing LESS pink today.


No, it just blends in with the p#$@$y pink.

MACH1
10-04-2009, 12:51 PM
Brady had to get his maxi pad adjusted.

steelpride12
10-04-2009, 12:54 PM
Rather see the Pats win. Hate the Ravens and sick of hearing them as super bowl winners this season.

AllD
10-04-2009, 01:00 PM
It gave the Pats breathing room to get their offense together. Not to mention there was a Pats defended pass which could have been called interference if the Pats were on O instead of D.

NJarhead
10-04-2009, 01:07 PM
I can't believe how hard I'm rooting for the Ravens. I'm going to need a 4 hour 3 stage shower afterwards!

steelpride12
10-04-2009, 01:13 PM
I hope Jared Gaither is doing alright. Getting off the field in a stretcher and ambulance.

NJarhead
10-04-2009, 01:20 PM
I hope Jared Gaither is doing alright. Getting off the field in a stretcher and ambulance.

Me too. All four limbs were moving, but they were really cautious getting him off the field...seemed like it took longer than usual. Very disheartening,

steelpride12
10-04-2009, 01:22 PM
2 roughing the passer calls on baltimore....dirty dirty

stillers4me
10-04-2009, 01:24 PM
In other news..The Browns just scored their first offensive TD........Bungs 14 Stains 7.

steelpride12
10-04-2009, 01:24 PM
17 to 7 Pats. Morris good run.
I hate both teams, but this outcome so far is the better one.

AllD
10-04-2009, 01:24 PM
The was a BS roughing call. The refs are bought and paid for and I am rooting for the Pats to win. Looks like the refs will do everything they can to guarantee it. BS grounding on Flacco too.

stillers4me
10-04-2009, 01:26 PM
17 to 7 Pats. Morris good run.
I hate both teams, but this outcome so far is the better one.

I really want the dreamy QB to beat the hairy eyed one today. Don't need the Raisins to get too far ahead of us.

One score game in the Ohio Toilet Bowl......go Stains! I would love to see all the air come out of the Bungs fans heads this week. Would make my life much easier.

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 01:29 PM
The was a BS roughing call. The refs are bought and paid for and I am rooting for the Pats to win. Looks like the refs will do everything they can to guarantee it. BS grounding on Flacco too.

Oh my, god. An unnecessary roughness on NE! Belichick's check just bounced!

fansince'76
10-04-2009, 01:38 PM
In other news the TT curse continues - JAX is slaughtering the Titans 27-3 at the half.

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 01:41 PM
In other news the TT curse continues - JAX is slaughtering the Titans 27-3 at the half.

Have they really not one a single game since the TT game?

fansince'76
10-04-2009, 01:46 PM
Have they really not one a single game since the TT game?

Nope. They lost their last regular season game last year after beating us, followed by a one-and-done in the playoffs and are now working on starting 0-4 this year.

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 01:49 PM
Nope. They lost their last regular season game last year after beating us, followed by a one-and-done in the playoffs and are now working on starting 0-4 this year.

I gotta admit, that's kinda creepy.

This could very well end with them kissing the towel to achieve restitution.

devilsdancefloor
10-04-2009, 01:51 PM
They broke into my game saying brady was in the locker room after his sneak... is he still out? Jacksonville isnt just beating the tits they are destroying them on all 3 dimensions of the game kinda funny

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 01:53 PM
They broke into my game saying brady was in the locker room after his sneak... is he still out? Jacksonville isnt just beating the tits they are destroying them on all 3 dimensions of the game kinda funny

No, Brady came right back out. I think he had to pee. :chuckle:

AllD
10-04-2009, 01:55 PM
I gotta admit, that's kinda creepy.

This could very well end with them kissing the towel to achieve restitution.



Plus, who are they going to put in for Colins? Vince Young? He is a time-bomb.

AllD
10-04-2009, 02:01 PM
Defensive holding on the birds to keep the Pats' drive alive.

Are the refs allowed to gamble on football?

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 02:04 PM
Defensive holding on the birds to keep the Pats' drive alive.

Are the refs allowed to gamble on football?

They just took away a 30yd play for holding. Holding applies to everybody. Quit whining.

Edman
10-04-2009, 02:32 PM
The Ravens are getting a little whipped now.

Ran into a buzzsaw?

MasterOfPuppets
10-04-2009, 02:39 PM
No, Brady came right back out. I think he had to pee. :chuckle:
or he had to install a panty liner.....

AllD
10-04-2009, 02:49 PM
No, Brady came right back out. I think he had to pee. :chuckle:

I heard he sits down to pee.

GutterflowerSteel
10-04-2009, 02:50 PM
It just kills me to say this but GO PATS! I live amongst Raisins fans- they're always squawking - we need for them to lose :tt04:

stillers4me
10-04-2009, 03:10 PM
Stains and Bungs in OT....20-20.

Can we dare pray for a tie. :chuckle:

AllD
10-04-2009, 03:29 PM
Boomer was slurping on Flacco's nutsac at the end of another game. Too bad the bird receivers Sweed the ball.

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 03:29 PM
Stains and Bungs in OT....20-20.

Can we dare pray for a tie. :chuckle:

I'd love to see a tie. Just for the hell of it.

Edman
10-04-2009, 03:30 PM
Mark Clayton pulls a Limas Sweed and drops a 4th down throw that would've given Baltimore 1st and Goal.

Bittersweet game. Good news is that the Ravens lost. Bad news is that the Patriots won.

Bungs and Brownies in OT. Interesting. But none of this matters if the Steelers don't take care of business tonight.

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 03:39 PM
Oh my god! 3 minutes left and Browns are punting! It's gonna happen.:applaudit:

steelpride12
10-04-2009, 03:41 PM
Good lets gain some ground in this division.

tony hipchest
10-04-2009, 03:43 PM
this sucks. a bungles loss and cleveland win helps us out much more than a tie.

bit it will be funny to watch the ugly ohio sisters kiss. (bungles will most likely pull out w/a fg)

stillers4me
10-04-2009, 03:55 PM
7 seconds and the Bungs pull off a field goal. Never saw a team work so hard to beat a shitty team in all my life. :chuckle:

tony hipchest
10-04-2009, 03:56 PM
he missed it. bungles were given a gift.

AllD
10-04-2009, 03:57 PM
The bungles had their Super Bowl last week. From here on out it's bungles as usual.

BlastFurnace
10-04-2009, 03:58 PM
Second week in a row the Bengals were dominated and they won.

They still have the two greatest chokers in the NFL....Marvin Lewis and Carson Palmer. They will fail...They will fail.

AllD
10-04-2009, 03:58 PM
In a related note, the Saints look like the 2000 Rams.

revefsreleets
10-04-2009, 05:21 PM
Overrated Pats beat the even more overrated Rats. But I guarantee you every nuthugging Brady-Boy in the press will have the Pats as a lock for another SB title.

This game showed me two things: Rats defense days of being elite are over, and their offense is no great shakes either.

AllD
10-04-2009, 05:29 PM
Overrated Pats beat the even more overrated Rats. But I guarantee you every nuthugging Brady-Boy in the press will have the Pats as a lock for another SB title.

This game showed me two things: Rats defense days of being elite are over, and their offense is no great shakes either.

It's all Rat hype because the Steelers owned them and the division for awhile. They have to spin it to sell more jerseys.

SteelCityMan786
10-04-2009, 06:16 PM
A win will be appreciated even more tonight.

HERE WE GO STEELERS HERE WE GO! Take advantage of the Rats loss!!!!!

The Patriot
10-04-2009, 06:49 PM
Overrated Pats beat the even more overrated Rats. But I guarantee you every nuthugging Brady-Boy in the press will have the Pats as a lock for another SB title.



:cookie: :cookie:

tony hipchest
10-04-2009, 06:59 PM
i thought flacco played a hell of a game. im still wondering how some believe brady quinn has got "all the tools" but flacco is just a "game manager who will prove to be a bust".

i hate to say it about the supposedly overrated flacco, but its blatantly obvious quinn cant even sniff his jock.

revefsreleets
10-04-2009, 07:26 PM
Quinn is in probably the WORST scenario he could be.

Flacco is probably in the best.

There's your difference. Had Tom Brady played on THIS Cleveland team, he'd be selling used cars by now.

In my defense, I ALSO said Matt Ryan would be a solid NFL QB and stated that Sanchez was the real deal and would easily be the best of the 2009 draft class. But, eh, what do I know? I mean, Quinn had his 3 starts, and that's all any QB needs on a poorly run team with very little talent and a coach who has no confidence in his QB to determine he's a CLEAR bust, and Flacco for sure is definitely going to the HOF...

Crow-Magnon
10-05-2009, 07:46 AM
First off, let me just say that the Ravens lost, even though they had a chance (and a good one) to pull it out at the end if Clayton hadn't pulled a Sweed and dropped that perfectly-thrown ball. BTW, congrats on the win against SD.

Now, having said that, I have to say that after a year of hearing all the pissing and moaning on this site about the Patriots, Brady and blatant knob-polishing by the refs, I now understand your complaints. I've seen some questionable calls in my day, but never so many in one day. And a 15 yard PF against the bench?

Brady.....truly the Golden Boy.

stlrtruck
10-05-2009, 07:47 AM
Brady.....truly the Golden Boy.

Correction, Marsha is Goodell's golden boy. Those of us who know and understand football know that he should be on the sideline wearing a skirt and holding pom-poms!

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 08:04 AM
Lewis said Brady gleefully remarked on the field that the call was "a cheap one."

:rofl: That would make me so mad.

Texasteel
10-05-2009, 08:35 AM
Overrated Pats beat the even more overrated Rats. But I guarantee you every nuthugging Brady-Boy in the press will have the Pats as a lock for another SB title.

This game showed me two things: Rats defense days of being elite are over, and their offense is no great shakes either.

I did find it funny that someone on NFL Network finally questioned Brady's manhood.

I believe his exact word were,"take off the skirt and put on some pants."

solardave
10-05-2009, 08:38 AM
Brady had to get his maxi pad adjusted.

Even Rodney Harrison (an ex team mate) said take the dress off and play some ball. If I was Brady I'd be ashamed of myself for wanting that call. What a wus!!!:rofl:

Crow-Magnon
10-05-2009, 09:25 AM
Quote from Marsha: "We're holding the ball. We're unprotected. You're sitting there defenseless.....they deserve to get flagged."

Translation: "I should be able to stand in the pocket all day, because I can't scramble like Roethlisberger. I can't make throws if I'm being sacked. That's bad for the Patriots and the NFL."

Whatta douchebag.

Ravnet
10-05-2009, 09:39 AM
Now, having said that, I have to say that after a year of hearing all the pissing and moaning on this site about the Patriots, Brady and blatant knob-polishing by the refs, I now understand your complaints.

Amen.

Honestly, I got sick and tired of Pittsburgh fans bitching about the Patriots, mostly because the Ravens didn't play New England in many meaningful games, but now I completely understand.

Actually, Brady is almost certainly worse now that he has had knee surgery because he has a sense of entitlement when it comes to the referees protecting him, and the officiating crew love nothing more than obliging to his every wish.

I thought that you all were foolishly mad at Brady just because he is successful, but I have now seen the light.

You literally cannot even consider touching that diva without being penalized .

Ngata put his hands up to block the ball, which, you know, is usually near the quarterback's head, and was flagged for 15.

Suggs was blocked downward and reached out to tackle Brady, and actually ended up not even touching him, but was flagged for 15.

Maybe the referees were just enforcing the absurdly ridiculous rules, but Ray is right in that Brady is straight-up punk.

X-Terminator
10-05-2009, 09:51 AM
About time you guys saw the light about Marsha. We tried to tell you that it was more than just whining because she's good, that the league and referees go out of their way to protect her. No other QB in the league gets the preferential treatment that Marsha gets, not even Peyton Manning. It's sickening. She is the biggest vagina in the league, period.

SteelersinCA
10-05-2009, 09:52 AM
Tom Brady the glorified male model in football pads cost me $700 for being such a vagina. I hate how he called for that penalty like a child whining for his binky even if it was against the Ravens. One thing I know now; I hate the Browns and Bengals more than anyone, followed by the Patriots and then the Ravens.

fansince'76
10-05-2009, 09:53 AM
You literally cannot even consider touching that diva without being penalized .

Which is exactly why I said this past offseason after the "Brady Rule" was enacted that anybody who has an opportunity to hit him needs to knock the living snot out of him since they're going to get tagged for 15 yards and/or a fine for it anyway. Seeing the gutless puss writhing around on the ground in pain at least makes it halfway worth it.

fansince'76
10-05-2009, 10:09 AM
Q: Are you sensitive to defenders' cries that quarterbacks get too many calls?

TB: Certainly not. No way (smiling). They've got to find ways....We're holding the ball, we're unprotected, just sitting there defenseless, so they've got to stay away from me. They deserve to get flagged (smiling).

http://www.patriots.com/mediacenter/index.cfm?ac=videonewsdetail&pid=39378&pcid=82#

That's football. Maybe you should go model full time for GQ if you can't handle it, douchebag.

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 11:02 AM
Here's what made it such a travesty: He was touched. He looked at the ref, and THEN the ref pulled the flag, as if BRADY is the one making the calls here.

That's....um....a little backward, no?

Ravnet
10-05-2009, 11:06 AM
(smiling)

That guy is such a profanityfilterprofanityfilterprofanityfilterprofa nityfiltering fruit its unbearable.

He finds his own mannerisms irresistibly adorable.

Indo
10-05-2009, 12:21 PM
Even Rodney Harrison (his TEAMMATE) told him to go put on a dress

And Keith Olberman(or whatever the douches name is) said that "two Roughing-the-Brady calls were made".

Now, I don't often agree with RayRay, but I had to back him when he said that they will put flags on these QBs pretty soon.

You know it's bad when I start agreeing with calls that either affected the Ratbirds, or were made by them.

SteelerEmpire
10-05-2009, 12:25 PM
Never thought I would cheer for the Pats to win.... but they got the Ravens.... putting us just one game behind them....

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 12:27 PM
Why is running into the QB below the knees such a controversial penalty? We have that rule for punters. You can't deliver a hard football hit by hitting somebody in that area. The worst you can do is trip them. Keep your feet and plow straight through him! When Wilfork took out Edwards knee in 2007, a lot of you guys were hollering for a suspension. And you even blamed the commissioner for favoritism! :mad:

The hand to the face penalty was a BS call, but the refs didn't force the Ravens' fumble, interception, and critical dropped pass.

fansince'76
10-05-2009, 12:33 PM
When Wilfork took out Edwards knee in 2007, a lot of you guys were hollering for a suspension. And you even blamed the commissioner for favoritism! :mad:

Edwards got the call immediately. He didn't get up, glare at the official, and THEN the flag was thrown. Big difference. It's a very dangerous precedent when a player can dictate when flags are thrown.

Texasteel
10-05-2009, 12:36 PM
Quote from Marsha: "We're holding the ball. We're unprotected. You're sitting there defenseless.....they deserve to get flagged."

Translation: "I should be able to stand in the pocket all day, because I can't scramble like Roethlisberger. I can't make throws if I'm being sacked. That's bad for the Patriots and the NFL."

Whatta douchebag.

OMG, I agree with a Ravens fan. I need a drink.

The_WARDen
10-05-2009, 12:43 PM
Amen.

Honestly, I got sick and tired of Pittsburgh fans bitching about the Patriots, mostly because the Ravens didn't play New England in many meaningful games, but now I completely understand.

Actually, Brady is almost certainly worse now that he has had knee surgery because he has a sense of entitlement when it comes to the referees protecting him, and the officiating crew love nothing more than obliging to his every wish.

I thought that you all were foolishly mad at Brady just because he is successful, but I have now seen the light.

You literally cannot even consider touching that diva without being penalized .

Ngata put his hands up to block the ball, which, you know, is usually near the quarterback's head, and was flagged for 15.

Suggs was blocked downward and reached out to tackle Brady, and actually ended up not even touching him, but was flagged for 15.

Maybe the referees were just enforcing the absurdly ridiculous rules, but Ray is right in that Brady is straight-up punk.

Welcome to our hell!

Actually if I knew that I was going to get flagged even when I held up, I'd say screw it and drill the punk...might as well earn my flag.

stlrtruck
10-05-2009, 01:34 PM
Why is running into the QB below the knees such a controversial penalty? We have that rule for punters. You can't deliver a hard football hit by hitting somebody in that area. The worst you can do is trip them. Keep your feet and plow straight through him! When Wilfork took out Edwards knee in 2007, a lot of you guys were hollering for a suspension. And you even blamed the commissioner for favoritism! :mad:

The hand to the face penalty was a BS call, but the refs didn't force the Ravens' fumble, interception, and critical dropped pass.

No they didn't call all those problems for the ratbirds but when they blatantly and blindly call very inconsistent penalities in favor of the patriots* yet don't keep the same standard for other players or teams then it becomes obvious that they either A) Don't understand the rulebook or B) They truly are in the mix for the patriots* by orders of someone else higher than them (hmmm who could that be? Commissioner Good Deal?)

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 01:38 PM
Why is running into the QB below the knees such a controversial penalty? We have that rule for punters. You can't deliver a hard football hit by hitting somebody in that area. The worst you can do is trip them. Keep your feet and plow straight through him! When Wilfork took out Edwards knee in 2007, a lot of you guys were hollering for a suspension. And you even blamed the commissioner for favoritism! :mad:

The hand to the face penalty was a BS call, but the refs didn't force the Ravens' fumble, interception, and critical dropped pass.

Are you KIDDING me? The game of football is 116 years old...until 3 years ago, the QB was a man and the rules treated him as such. Not anymore...

As for your sorry-assed apology for Brady-douche, what YOU'RE desrcibing already WAS a penalty, which came about when (Wah!) "Kimo hit Carson too hard!" (Hence the 113 years).

The Brady bullshit took a bad thing and made it worse...now it's like touch football. Tom Brady is everything that's wrong with the game now. An overrated cry-baby jackass system QB literally MADE by a cheating coach that gave him "The answers to the test", and now there's a whole gaggle of arrogant idiots defending this mass douchery simply because they are blind homer Massholes and don't actually CARE about the integrity of the game, just victory at any cost for their team.

It's disgusting and this is a RARE case when I actually see something on this board that just makes me ANGRY.

Defending this travesty of a POS of a rule is lower than whale shit. The game is literally being DESTROYED right in front of your eyes, yet you'd rather DEFEND the nonsense than turn a critical eye towards it and condemn this ridiculousness.

There is NO excuse for this stupid rule. It's the worst thing the NFL has done in 45 years....

HughC
10-05-2009, 01:40 PM
I read somewhere that officiating crew called the most penalties in the league in '07, most in '08, and second most so far in '09. Mix that with the NFL's edict to protect the quarterback, no lunging for the knees, no hitting the helmet, and voila, that was the result. The Ngata call was very borderline, but he did hit Brady in the head. Not surprised with the Suggs penalty, it's not the first nor the last time this year somebody is going to get a flag when he dives at a quarterback's knees.

Actually the penalty that surprised me the most was the unsportsmanlike on the Ravens bench. Coaches mouth off to refs every game but never get a flag for that. The only thing I can figure is the ref must have told him to cool it or he'd flag him but Harbaugh kept going with his f-bombs.

While I agree the calls to protect quarterbacks are getting out of hand, Lewis and the Ravens need to realize that's the way the NFL wants games called, and that crew drops more flags than any other. Bad coaching, bad situational awareness. It just comes across as making excuses rather than accepting responsibility after a defeat.

I_Bleed_Black_And_Gold
10-05-2009, 01:42 PM
Edwards got the call immediately. He didn't get up, glare at the official, and THEN the flag was thrown. Big difference. It's a very dangerous precedent when a player can dictate when flags are thrown.

I was watching this in HD with surround sound of full blast. You can actually see the Ref nod to Brady as he is hopping around and say "Yes sir Mr. Brady, sir" before throwing the flag.

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 01:48 PM
PLEASE don't apologize for the rule and say "Well, that's just the way the game is played now".

No, it's not...nor should it be...No one player is bigger than the game, but that's exactly what's being foisted off here...and I'm extremely discouraged to see a few people actually ACCEPTING this awfulness...

HughC
10-05-2009, 01:52 PM
One other thing: speaking of bad situational awareness, did anybody else catch Lewis on the drive in the 1st quarter just before New England scored? He starts celebrating and running off the field, all fired up as if the Ravens had recovered a fumble or something. Looked like he thought it was fourth down and it wasn't.

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 01:57 PM
Edwards got the call immediately. He didn't get up, glare at the official, and THEN the flag was thrown. Big difference. It's a very dangerous precedent when a player can dictate when flags are thrown.

Then get better officials. It's no secret that refs are trained to favor the quarterback and the offense as a whole. Why is the game changing? Money. When you have QBs nowadays with hundred million dollar contracts, owners don't want their investments at risk week in and out, so they have these rule changes to protect them. And these rule changes consequentially put defenses at a disadvantage.

Teams are also adapting to these changes. Right after Belichick saw his defense give up a 21-3 lead to the Colts in the AFCC game, he switched strategies and completely reshaped the Pats from a defensive team to a offensive power. Don't tell me you can't see a similar metamorphoses taking place in the Steelers (at least based on the way they've been playing).

You've been around longer than I, but I know that before 1990 it was all about Steelers defense! Raiders defense! Bears defense! Now it's the opposite. And its not because of some love affair between the Patriots and Goodell, its Goodell making the NFL more oriented around money than football.

I_Bleed_Black_And_Gold
10-05-2009, 02:04 PM
Then all the QBs should wear red jerseys and have a two hand touch rule instated.

I know you are a Pats homer, but even you should be able to see the favoritism. It was all OK until Brady gets injured, now they make a rule against it. It was fine before he got hurt, but somehow no longer ok now that he went down.

The_WARDen
10-05-2009, 02:06 PM
Then get better officials. It's no secret that refs are trained to favor the quarterback and the offense as a whole. Why is the game changing? Money. When you have QBs nowadays with hundred million dollar contracts, owners don't want their investments at risk week in and out, so they have these rule changes to protect them. And these rule changes consequentially put defenses at a disadvantage.

Teams are also adapting to these changes. Right after Belichick saw his defense give up a 21-3 lead to the Colts in the AFCC game, he switched strategies and completely reshaped the Pats from a defensive team to a offensive power. Don't tell me you can't see a similar metamorphoses taking place in the Steelers (at least based on the way they've been playing).

You've been around longer than I, but I know that before 1990 it was all about Steelers defense! Raiders defense! Bears defense! Now it's the opposite. And its not because of some love affair between the Patriots and Goodell, its Goodell making the NFL more oriented around money than football.

Sooooo.... Matthew Stafford & Mark Sanchez get those same calls then? They should they both make more than Brady.

Ravnet
10-05-2009, 02:07 PM
One other thing: speaking of bad situational awareness, did anybody else catch Lewis on the drive in the 1st quarter just before New England scored? He starts celebrating and running off the field, all fired up as if the Ravens had recovered a fumble or something. Looked like he thought it was fourth down and it wasn't.

I think he thought the goaline was the first down or something; I really am not sure what he was doing.

Anyway, the Ravens accepted defeated and repeatedly noted that the Patriots are a good team, but I honestly don't think Ray is even remotely out of line for pointing out that Brady was smiling and laughing as Baltimore was penalized for "roughing the passer" despite Suggs barely even grazing Brady's legs.

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 02:12 PM
Are you KIDDING me? The game of football is 116 years old...until 3 years ago, the QB was a man and the rules treated him as such. Not anymore...

As for your sorry-assed apology for Brady-douche, what YOU'RE desrcibing already WAS a penalty, which came about when (Wah!) "Kimo hit Carson too hard!" (Hence the 113 years).

The Brady bullshit took a bad thing and made it worse...now it's like touch football. Tom Brady is everything that's wrong with the game now. An overrated cry-baby jackass system QB literally MADE by a cheating coach that gave him "The answers to the test", and now there's a whole gaggle of arrogant idiots defending this mass douchery simply because they are blind homer Massholes and don't actually CARE about the integrity of the game, just victory at any cost for their team.

It's disgusting and this is a RARE case when I actually see something on this board that just makes me ANGRY.

Defending this travesty of a POS of a rule is lower than whale shit. The game is literally being DESTROYED right in front of your eyes, yet you'd rather DEFEND the nonsense than turn a critical eye towards it and condemn this ridiculousness.

There is NO excuse for this stupid rule. It's the worst thing the NFL has done in 45 years....

Face masks, horse-collars, running into the kicker, running into the holder, helmet to helmets, unnecessary roughness, unsportsmanlike conduct, and clipping penalties all take away from the game of play, but they are there to protect players. But running into the QB's knees is the travesty that broke the NFL.

Ravnet
10-05-2009, 02:14 PM
Face masks, horse-collars, running into the kicker, running into the holder, helmet to helmets, unnecessary roughness, unsportsmanlike conduct, and clipping penalties all take away from the game of play, but they are there to protect players. But running into the QB's knees is the travesty that broke the NFL.

Some quarterbacks are just more protected than others.

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 02:15 PM
Why is running into the QB below the knees such a controversial penalty? We have that rule for punters. You can't deliver a hard football hit by hitting somebody in that area. The worst you can do is trip them. Keep your feet and plow straight through him! When Wilfork took out Edwards knee in 2007, a lot of you guys were hollering for a suspension. And you even blamed the commissioner for favoritism! :mad:

The hand to the face penalty was a BS call, but the refs didn't force the Ravens' fumble, interception, and critical dropped pass.

I just wish they'd call it what it is:

"Roughing the Brady. 15 yard penalty and loss of draft pick." :chuckle:

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 02:16 PM
Some quarterbacks are just more protected than others.

Sadly, that is a fact and it is an evident one.

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 02:25 PM
Some quarterbacks are just more protected than others.

Look, call be a homer, but I don't want to lose Brady for another season. I understand that injuries happen, but they don't need to happen when the ball is off and a linemen makes a careless lunge at the quarterback's legs. A blindside hit to back is what made Brady fumble for a touchdown. Do that! Pound the shit out of him and win the game. Just don't lunge at an area where the best you can accomplish is an injury.

You lost this game by a freak dropped pass.

HughC
10-05-2009, 02:34 PM
I think we're focusing on the wrong person(s) to blame for the way the game is being played and called. How about starting with Jeff Fischer and Bill Polian, who pretty much run the NFL rules committee? Remember how Polian who pushed for changes on calls on how much contact defenders could have with receivers and running backs a few years ago - and then the next season the Colts won a Super Bowl. These are the same ones that work with Goodell in either making new rules or having existing rules called more closely.

I'd also say take a look at the networks and question how much influence they have over the NFL and these rules. Consider how a game is marketed. It's not "the Packers versus the Vikings", it's Brett Favre and the Vikings face off against Aaron Rodgers and the Packers. Football may be the ultimate team sport, but the game is sold by promoting each team's quarterback. The networks don't want backup quarterbacks playing. To reduce the possibility of that happening the rules are altered.

Regarding the refs, I blame them the least. They don't make the rules, and the NFL tells them they want certains penalties called more closely. I think the alternative, having certain refs ignore some rules or those orders would be wose and chaotic. The best we can ask for from them is that they call it the same both ways, which they did. There was a similar roughing the passer call that Flacco benefited from that one of the Patriots defensive lineman (Mike Wright?) was called on.

Good for Ray for saying something most fans agree with, but to do it at that point in time - right after a loss - makes what he said less meaningful. It loses much of its credibility because it sounds like he's making excuses for the loss.

revefsreleets
10-05-2009, 02:56 PM
By those standards, Ben is owed about 150 roughing the passer calls...and I'm not joking.

I give up...all I can hope and wish for is these super douchey teams get beat FAIR AND SQUARE early and often this season, although there is absolutely no reason, given what I've seen so far, that there's any chance of that actually happening.

I feel sorry for Pats fans...they are deprived of knowing what it's like to actually EARN respect and wins...but I'm not going to be able to fix that...

As Pontius Pilate said "I wash my hands of this matter"

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 03:17 PM
By those standards, Ben is owed about 150 roughing the passer calls...and I'm not joking.

I give up...all I can hope and wish for is these super douchey teams get beat FAIR AND SQUARE early and often this season, although there is absolutely no reason, given what I've seen so far, that there's any chance of that actually happening.

I feel sorry for Pats fans...they are deprived of knowing what it's like to actually EARN respect and wins...but I'm not going to be able to fix that...

Yep. They were a hungry team in 2001 (albeit a cheating one), but they've had sh*t handed to them ever since.

stlrtruck
10-05-2009, 03:53 PM
Look, call be a homer, but I don't want to lose Brady for another season. I understand that injuries happen, but they don't need to happen when the ball is off and a linemen makes a careless lunge at the quarterback's legs. A blindside hit to back is what made Brady fumble for a touchdown. Do that! Pound the shit out of him and win the game. Just don't lunge at an area where the best you can accomplish is an injury.

You lost this game by a freak dropped pass.

You're a homer! :sign11:

You make this defense but I'm sure as you watched other team's QBs take a hit far worse than the one Brady incurred without penalty you weren't calling for fair treatment to all players.

Yes the ravens lost the game, on more than one dropped pass, however it's the blind leading the blind when you fail to recognize that Marsha receives preferently treatment - along with the other jagoffs that wear the patriots* uniform - and then he's pompus and arrogant enough to smile about it on the field!

Just like his coach, his owner, and the commissioner (at this point) - NO CLASS!

If they're going to treat him like a woman, it's only going to be a matter of time before someone truly takes him out because of it and because of his arrogance!

MasterOfPuppets
10-05-2009, 03:55 PM
i don't know why the nfl just don't use the probowl rules ..no blitzing...4 man rush max. ...hell why not make it a 15 yd penalty for just getting within 5 yards of brady. or make them count to 5 mississippi before you can rush the passer. :chuckle:

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 05:10 PM
You're a homer! :sign11:

You make this defense but I'm sure as you watched other team's QBs take a hit far worse than the one Brady incurred without penalty you weren't calling for fair treatment to all players.

Yes the ravens lost the game, on more than one dropped pass, however it's the blind leading the blind when you fail to recognize that Marsha receives preferently treatment - along with the other jagoffs that wear the patriots* uniform - and then he's pompus and arrogant enough to smile about it on the field!

Just like his coach, his owner, and the commissioner (at this point) - NO CLASS!

If they're going to treat him like a woman, it's only going to be a matter of time before someone truly takes him out because of it and because of his arrogance!

Scenario 1. Pick the toughest player on the Steelers, have him lean forward on his front leg (as in the throwing motion), and let lil ole me run up and plow my weight right into that leg. Will I have tackled him? - No. Will my force have put a great strain on his knee ligaments and possibly damaged them? -Yes. Is that an accurate measure of his toughness? - I say no.

Scenario 2. Have that same player stand there in that same position and let me run up and try to tackle him. Will I succeed? - No. Is that an accurate measure of his toughness? - Absolutely yes.

Indo
10-05-2009, 05:22 PM
The problem isn't the rule---no one really wants to see someone get hurt. The problem is the inconsistency with which the rule is enforced. Ben gets hit late all the time. He gets hit high; he gets hit low; why isn't it EVER called. The next time you watch a game where Marsha is involved, try not to be a homer and watch how the refs call the game differently. Watch a Steelers game and then come back and tell us that ALL of the hits on Ben were "legal".

The other problem is the complete pussification of the sport---they want the QB "Hit" zone to be the same as the baseball strike zone (actually a little higher)---with "legal" hits being "between the waist and the shoulders, but not TOO high on the shoulders and...", you get the idea. Like RayRay said (the one and ONLY time I have ever agreed with him), they just need to put a velcro belt and some flags on the QBs

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 05:23 PM
Scenario 1. Pick the toughest player on the Steelers, have him lean forward on his front leg (as in the throwing motion), and let lil ole me run up and plow my weight right into that leg. Will I have tackled him? - No. Will my force have put a great strain on his knee ligaments and possibly damaged them? -Yes. Is that an accurate measure of his toughness? - I say no.

Scenario 2. Have that same player stand there in that same position and let me run up and try to tackle him. Will I succeed? - No. Is that an accurate measure of his toughness? - Absolutely yes.

Tom Brady was not hit like that on that penalty. If you're claiming the intent was there (which should not matter), then why can't that be judged on helmet-to-helmet hits?
Doesn't Flacco deserve the same protection? What about Ben?
Atlanta also got a penalty for what has been described as a tap on the back on Brady.

Luis Castillo hit Ben in the knees just as you described (couple years ago). Nothing was done then: No flags, no fines. Ben got knocked out of the game, but thankfully was not lost for the season.

Carson Palmer, same thing: Knock out, no penalty or fine.

There was another QB where this happened (anyone remember who it is?).

But when it happens to Precious, the entire NFL world is thrust into a panic: Rule changes/game changes.

This is but one of many reasons why the rest of the league fan base hates the Patriots.

"Roughing the Brady - 15 yards - automatic first down."

Nevermore
10-05-2009, 05:39 PM
I found both of the calls to be questionable. I admit this was not a "game changing" event, we dropped an easy pass on 4th down and didn't finish, but even with the rule, you can't make that call. He didn't even hit Brady's legs. He was NEAR his legs, but no more than a brush occured. If someone tees up on a guy to ram his helmet into someone else's head, and then MISSES, is that a helmet to helmet penalty!? What if I want to horse collar you and miss? NOT a penalty.

Brady knew it was a cheap 15 yards. He even pumped his fist like he "won" the call when the flag came out. He didn't get hit, didn't go down. Nothing. If Suggs had hit him, I agree on the penalty. As for the blow to the head call, that has gotten out of hand as well. If there is an actual BLOW to the head, call it. If your forearm brushes the QB's ear, that is BS. I find the QB protection rules out of control. Linemen get hit in the knees EVERY play. Linemen get clocked in the head EVERY play. Because the expect it, it's okay? Bradshaw and Unitas took hits all over their bodies. Just like every other QB in the NFL before the past 5 years. Protect them from dirty hits, but don't just give away 15 yards because it was ALMOST a dirty hit.

Those calls were crap! Period.

fansince'76
10-05-2009, 05:45 PM
If Suggs had hit him, I agree on the penalty. As for the blow to the head call, that has gotten out of hand as well. If there is an actual BLOW to the head, call it. If your forearm brushes the QB's ear, that is BS. I find the QB protection rules out of control. Linemen get hit in the knees EVERY play. Linemen get clocked in the head EVERY play. Because the expect it, it's okay? Bradshaw and Unitas took hits all over their bodies. Just like every other QB in the NFL before the past 5 years. Protect them from dirty hits, but don't just give away 15 yards because it was ALMOST a dirty hit..

Agreed. If they call the games the Steelers and Ravens play against each other this year that tight, both teams will wind up with 200+ yards in penalties and could probably pay the national debt off with the amount of money that will be collected in fines.

Preacher
10-05-2009, 05:59 PM
It was a MONEY CALL.... The NFL is afraid of losing MONEY if their "Golden Boy" is injured...

1. The D was PUSHED into Brady. He wasn't GOING for the knees.

2. He didn't fall INTO the knees, he was falling PAST the knees and brushed them.

3. Brady danced and CRIED for a penalty instead of shutting up and being a man about it. I don't think I have seen Ben EVER cry about it being or not being a penalty when he gets hit...and he gets hit a LOT more often and a LOT later than Brady EVER has.

When your OWN X TEAMMATE tells you to take off the skirt and play football... on NATIONAL TV. Well, that is saying something.



HEY BRADY...... Your crown is over here....

http://static.promopeddler.com/prodpics/bigprodimgs/4610000/4610020.jpg

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 06:02 PM
Tom Brady was not hit like that on that penalty. If you're claiming the intent was there (which should not matter), then why can't that be judged on helmet-to-helmet hits?
Doesn't Flacco deserve the same protection? What about Ben?
Atlanta also got a penalty for what has been described as a tap on the back on Brady.

Luis Castillo hit Ben in the knees just as you described (couple years ago). Nothing was done then: No flags, no fines. Ben got knocked out of the game, but thankfully was not lost for the season.

Carson Palmer, same thing: Knock out, no penalty or fine.

There was another QB where this happened (anyone remember who it is?).

But when it happens to Precious, the entire NFL world is thrust into a panic: Rule changes/game changes.

This is but one of many reasons why the rest of the league fan base hates the Patriots.

"Roughing the Brady - 15 yards - automatic first down."

Palmer's injury came at the end of the season. Brady is one of the few big QBs to miss an entire season from an injury. And it didn't reflect his toughness. Nobody can play football without their MCL. And it all occurred because a lineman dove at his knee when the ball was already away. Giving Brady 15 yards and an auto first isn't good for the game, but they want to deter linemen from hitting a Qb's knees. Do you think I'd have given a damn if they flew the flag after Brady got hurt?

You've been without Polamalu for 3 games and it's showing. What if he was gone for 16 because of an injury caused by something that didn't affect the play? The "Brady rule" doesn't stop the defense from doing itsjob. The only disadvantage is the 15 yard penalty, but what is that compared to losing a key player.

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 06:10 PM
Palmer's injury came at the end of the season. Brady is one of the few big QBs to miss an entire season from an injury. And it didn't reflect his toughness. Nobody can play football without their MCL. And it all occurred because a lineman dove at his knee when the ball was already away. Giving Brady 15 yards and an auto first isn't good for the game, but they want to deter linemen from hitting a Qb's knees. Do you think I'd have given a damn if they flew the flag after Brady got hurt?

You've been without Polamalu for 3 games and it's showing. What if he was gone for 16 because of an injury caused by something that didn't affect the play? The "Brady rule" doesn't stop the defense from doing itsjob. The only disadvantage is the 15 yard penalty, but what is that compared to losing a key player.

No, Tom Brady is just the only one whose name has been shoved down our throats, so everyone knows about it.

My issue isn't the rule. My issue is the way it's being enforced. It's apparent to me (and many others as you can see) that HE is being favored in no fewer than the following ways:

1). HE NEVER GOT HIT ON THAT PLAY!!!!!! - and it's not the only time he's drawn a flag for being farted near.
2). He is the only one who is consistently being protected.

Makes me want to see someone knock the living shit out of him. Like your boy Rodney said, "Hey Tom, take off the skirt; put on some slacks and be a man."

Crow-Magnon
10-05-2009, 06:16 PM
Palmer's injury came at the end of the season. Brady is one of the few big QBs to miss an entire season from an injury. And it didn't reflect his toughness. Nobody can play football without their MCL. And it all occurred because a lineman dove at his knee when the ball was already away. Giving Brady 15 yards and an auto first isn't good for the game, but they want to deter linemen from hitting a Qb's knees. Do you think I'd have given a damn if they flew the flag after Brady got hurt?

You've been without Polamalu for 3 games and it's showing. What if he was gone for 16 because of an injury caused by something that didn't affect the play? The "Brady rule" doesn't stop the defense from doing itsjob. The only disadvantage is the 15 yard penalty, but what is that compared to losing a key player.

Look, it's was a BS call whether you have the cojones to admit it or not.

What YOU want is for Brady to have the ability to stand in the pocket for 8-10 seconds until Welker or Moss gets open. And then heave the ball downfield and not have to worry about getting popped. Well, maybe that's football to you, but it isn't to me. Don't want to get popped? Get rid of the ball quicker or run and slide.

But no, Goodell and others of his ilk have decided that potent offenses are the keys to ratings and $$$$, so they pass new rules to protect the primadonna QB's like Brady and Manning. A DL or LB is trying his utmost to reach the QB before he releases. Sometimes they are in the process of making a hit when the ball is released and then the QB's are hit milliseconds later. That's not RTP, it's football.

Well, I guess I'm wrong. It is RTP when we're talking about Brady. Flacco got hit and knocked into Gaither causing him to be carted off the field, but as Joe isn't a Golden Boy, it wasn't flagged.

And trust me, Steelers fans know all too well that Ben ain't no Golden Boy. See, he's tough and old school and will take shots to make a play. Therefore the officials blow off RTP unless it's obviously blatant.

Those calls sucked, dude. Be a man and admit it.

Preacher
10-05-2009, 06:21 PM
Look, it's was a BS call whether you have the cojones to admit it or not.

What YOU want is for Brady to have the ability to stand in the pocket for 8-10 seconds until Welker or Moss gets open. And then heave the ball downfield and not have to worry about getting popped. Well, maybe that's football to you, but it isn't to me. Don't want to get popped? Get rid of the ball quicker or run and slide.

But no, Goodell and others of his ilk have decided that potent offenses are the keys to ratings and $$$$, so they pass new rules to protect the primadonna QB's like Brady and Manning. A DL or LB is trying his utmost to reach the QB before he releases. Sometimes they are in the process of making a hit when the ball is released and then the QB's are hit milliseconds later. That's not RTP, it's football.

Well, I guess I'm wrong. It is RTP when we're talking about Brady. Flacco got hit and knocked into Gaither causing him to be carted off the field, but as Joe isn't a Golden Boy, it wasn't flagged.

And trust me, Steelers fans know all too well that Ben ain't no Golden Boy. See, he's tough and old school and will take shots to make a play. Therefore the officials blow off RTP unless it's obviously blatant.

Those calls sucked, dude. Be a man and admit it.

First time I saw that. . . . I was wondering where the flag was...

Texasteel
10-05-2009, 06:30 PM
It was a MONEY CALL.... The NFL is afraid of losing MONEY if their "Golden Boy" is injured...

1. The D was PUSHED into Brady. He wasn't GOING for the knees.

2. He didn't fall INTO the knees, he was falling PAST the knees and brushed them.

3. Brady danced and CRIED for a penalty instead of shutting up and being a man about it. I don't think I have seen Ben EVER cry about it being or not being a penalty when he gets hit...and he gets hit a LOT more often and a LOT later than Brady EVER has.

When your OWN X TEAMMATE tells you to take off the skirt and play football... on NATIONAL TV. Well, that is saying something.



HEY BRADY...... Your crown is over here....

http://static.promopeddler.com/prodpics/bigprodimgs/4610000/4610020.jpg


I like it!!!! Princes Brady will look good in that.:thumbsup:

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 06:40 PM
Look, it's was a BS call whether you have the cojones to admit it or not.

What YOU want is for Brady to have the ability to stand in the pocket for 8-10 seconds until Welker or Moss gets open. And then heave the ball downfield and not have to worry about getting popped. Well, maybe that's football to you, but it isn't to me. Don't want to get popped? Get rid of the ball quicker or run and slide.

But no, Goodell and others of his ilk have decided that potent offenses are the keys to ratings and $$$$, so they pass new rules to protect the primadonna QB's like Brady and Manning. A DL or LB is trying his utmost to reach the QB before he releases. Sometimes they are in the process of making a hit when the ball is released and then the QB's are hit milliseconds later. That's not RTP, it's football.

Well, I guess I'm wrong. It is RTP when we're talking about Brady. Flacco got hit and knocked into Gaither causing him to be carted off the field, but as Joe isn't a Golden Boy, it wasn't flagged.

And trust me, Steelers fans know all too well that Ben ain't no Golden Boy. See, he's tough and old school and will take shots to make a play. Therefore the officials blow off RTP unless it's obviously blatant.

Those calls sucked, dude. Be a man and admit it.

I'm not talking about the calls, I'm talking about the rule. And yes, I would like my Qb to have 8 seconds in the pocket. I don't know a fan that wouldn't. What I don't want is a linemen carelessly diving low at a Qb and causing an injury that ends his season. Every quarterback takes hits (and you'd be surprised to know that Brady has taken the most recorded hits of any quarterback since 2001) but it doesn't matter how tough you are if you get hit in an area in which you're exposed.

Yes, the penalty where Brady got hit in the face was bad. Yes, because Brady jumped out of the way, the "going for the Qb's knees penalty" was bad. What else was bad? The spot of the ball on the trick field goal play. Those lousy calls changed the game, but not as much as the Ravens fumble on the kickoff, the interception, Brady's fumble for a Td, and the dropped pass on 4th down.

Patriots got two free first downs from the refs. But they got a free field goal, courtesy of the Ravens special teams, a critical turnover, courtesy of Flacco, and ultimately a win because of a dropped pass.

AllD
10-05-2009, 06:40 PM
The refs are interpreting RTP similar to offsides, but with a 15 yard penalty. The media is already saying how Brady lobbied the refs to make the call. Without those calls the Pats lose.

As mentioned above, the Brady rule was designed to protect all QBs, but it seems that it is only penalizing teams that try to tackle the guy it is named after. After all, he deserves special treatment because he is the most wonderful guy to ever throw a pigskin.

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 06:50 PM
I'm not talking about the calls, I'm talking about the rule. And yes, I would like my Qb to have 8 seconds in the pocket. I don't know a fan that wouldn't. What I don't want is a linemen carelessly diving low at a Qb and causing an injury that ends his season. Every quarterback takes hits (and you'd be surprised to know that Brady has taken the most recorded hits of any quarterback since 2001) but it doesn't matter how tough you are if you get hit in an area in which you're exposed.

Yes, the penalty where Brady got hit in the face was bad. Yes, because Brady jumped out of the way, the "going for the Qb's knees penalty" was bad. What else was bad? The spot of the ball on the trick field goal play. Those lousy calls changed the game, but not as much as the Ravens fumble on the kickoff, the interception, Brady's fumble for a Td, and the dropped pass on 4th down.

Patriots got two free first downs from the refs. But they got a free field goal, courtesy of the Ravens special teams, a critical turnover, courtesy of Flacco, and ultimately a win because of a dropped pass.

Both of those led to TD's. Ravens lost by 6 points.

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 09:09 PM
Both of those led to TD's. Ravens lost by 6 points.

Yeah, then its still a one possession game. And you can't assume that Brady's fumble-TD still would have occurred. It would have been a different game, but by no means "in the bag".

NJarhead
10-05-2009, 09:19 PM
Yeah, then its still a one possession game. And you can't assume that Brady's fumble-TD still would have occurred. It would have been a different game, but by no means "in the bag".

Brady's fumble was caused by the play on the field, not the Refs. We'll never know what would have been, we only know what we saw, and what we saw...or what I saw, pissed me off. Pissed off the other team, a lot of retired players and even at least one former Patriot. What's more, Brady's come to expect those BS calls. It's pathetic.

I wish the Ravens knew they were going to lose that game and what impact the refs would have on it. I would have loved to have seen them REALLY show Brady, the refs and the spoiled fools in that stadium what "roughing the passer" looks like.

Nothing against you, I'm just sick of that crap.

tony hipchest
10-05-2009, 09:30 PM
i think steelers opponents have only been flagged for roughing three times in bens entire career.

brady has gotten the token flag three times in the past 2 weeks.

team allegiances asid, there is definitely something fukked up there.

ben is the higher paid qb, and as far as this season goes the statistically better qb.

goodell has an obvious boner for robert "craft" and his worldly ambitions.

Ravnet
10-05-2009, 10:15 PM
It's probably a combination of Ravens player being stereotype, as mean, nasty, and dirty players, and Brady just being a huge bitch.

The combination caused the referees to be extra alert when it came to roughing the passer.

tony hipchest
10-05-2009, 10:30 PM
It's probably a combination of Ravens player being stereotype, as mean, nasty, and dirty players, and Brady just being a huge bitch.

The combination caused the referees to be extra alert when it came to roughing the passer.ah yes...

just like troy polamalu being flagged twice and having another horrible call go against him in less than a half of the game opener (he called out the refs for turning this into a panys league last season).

or like ward being flagged twice for nothing more than being a wr trying to throw a block vs the bungles last week. (he said he would block keith rivers just the same).

you should feel good. ryan clark could be riding the pine and the ravens are still assured atleast 2 gift penalties when we match up for his hit on willie mac.

tony hipchest
10-05-2009, 10:56 PM
brett favre didnt run off the field to try to duck that mean ol suzie kolber for an interview after defeating his old team.

then again, brett favre isnt a little bitch.

The Patriot
10-05-2009, 11:42 PM
brett favre didnt run off the field to try to duck that mean ol suzie kolber for an interview after defeating his old team.

then again, brett favre isnt a little bitch.

Oh, snap! Or maybe Brett Favre likes attention.

tony hipchest
10-05-2009, 11:46 PM
oh snap! maybe tom brady hates it.

:rolleyes:

*insert goat photograph, GQ layout here*

stlrtruck
10-06-2009, 07:24 AM
It's probably a combination of Ravens player being stereotype, as mean, nasty, and dirty players, and Brady just being a huge pu$$y.

The combination caused the referees to be extra alert when it came to roughing the passer.

Fixed it for you. :drink:

revefsreleets
10-06-2009, 07:27 AM
The saddest part of all this is watching the Pats fans DEFEND this garbage like it's somehow even remotely legitimate...

Edman
10-06-2009, 10:43 AM
I said it in another thread. Favre may be a diva, but he's no Tom Brady.

At least we were confirmed on Tom's whiny status. He is what's wrong with the league today. Where Roger Goodell protects his pet team.

fansince'76
10-06-2009, 10:45 AM
The saddest part of all this is watching the Pats fans DEFEND this garbage like it's somehow even remotely legitimate...

Did you really expect anything else? After all, they rationalized and defended the cheating tooth and nail (and still do). All I'm hoping for now is that someone knocks his ass into next week and makes the 15 yards at least halfway worth it.

The_WARDen
10-06-2009, 10:49 AM
Look, it's was a BS call whether you have the cojones to admit it or not.

What YOU want is for Brady to have the ability to stand in the pocket for 8-10 seconds until Welker or Moss gets open. And then heave the ball downfield and not have to worry about getting popped. Well, maybe that's football to you, but it isn't to me. Don't want to get popped? Get rid of the ball quicker or run and slide.

But no, Goodell and others of his ilk have decided that potent offenses are the keys to ratings and $$$$, so they pass new rules to protect the primadonna QB's like Brady and Manning. A DL or LB is trying his utmost to reach the QB before he releases. Sometimes they are in the process of making a hit when the ball is released and then the QB's are hit milliseconds later. That's not RTP, it's football.

Well, I guess I'm wrong. It is RTP when we're talking about Brady. Flacco got hit and knocked into Gaither causing him to be carted off the field, but as Joe isn't a Golden Boy, it wasn't flagged.

And trust me, Steelers fans know all too well that Ben ain't no Golden Boy. See, he's tough and old school and will take shots to make a play. Therefore the officials blow off RTP unless it's obviously blatant.

Those calls sucked, dude. Be a man and admit it.

Wow! Leave it to a Cheatriot fan to bring Ravens & Steelers' fans together.

Without his protectors, Marsha wouldn't survive playing in the AFC North against Baltimore & Pittsburgh defenses 2 games each.

revefsreleets
10-06-2009, 11:13 AM
Did you really expect anything else? After all, they rationalized and defended the cheating tooth and nail (and still do). All I'm hoping for now is that someone knocks his ass into next week and makes the 15 yards at least halfway worth it.

Actually, I think that's what will end up happening. This putrid rule will end up have the opposite effect of what is intended. Instead of protecting The Golden Douche, it will make defenders make sure that the shots they get on Tammy Brady really count. He'll be an even bigger target and may end up really hurt. That'll be just AWFUL....

Watching Pats fans repeatedly blindly defend the awful stench emanating from the New England Patriots franchise illustrates exactly how some people will sacrifice honor and dignity and integrity in order to win at any cost.

I've tried to put myself in their shoes, but I just can't do it. Once again makes me happy I'm a Steeler fan where winning is integral with being classy and above board...

Gaist
10-06-2009, 12:24 PM
Watching Pats fans repeatedly blindly defend the awful stench emanating from the New England Patriots franchise illustrates exactly how some people will sacrifice honor and dignity and integrity in order to win at any cost.

I've tried to put myself in their shoes, but I just can't do it. Once again makes me happy I'm a Steeler fan where winning is integral with being classy and above board...

Wow, this could be the most delusional post in the history of the internet. Pretty impressive.

Not shocking that no mention has been made of Mike Wright's penalty on Joe Flacco for roughing the passer. The calls went both ways. There shouldn't even be a debate about Terrell Suggs' penalty.

fansince'76
10-06-2009, 12:55 PM
Wow, this could be the most delusional post in the history of the internet. Pretty impressive.

Not shocking that no mention has been made of Mike Wright's penalty on Joe Flacco for roughing the passer. The calls went both ways. There shouldn't even be a debate about Terrell Suggs' penalty.

Ever seen a Pats board - any Pats board? Talk about "delusionsofgrandeur.com." So the penalty on Wright was called simply because Flacco looked at the ref and whined as well? :coffee:

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 02:20 PM
Wow! Leave it to a Cheatriot fan to bring Ravens & Steelers' fans together.
Without his protectors, Marsha wouldn't survive playing in the AFC North against Baltimore & Pittsburgh defenses 2 games each.

:doh: :rofl:

Indo
10-06-2009, 02:56 PM
Wow, this could be the most delusional post in the history of the internet. Pretty impressive.

Not shocking that no mention has been made of Mike Wright's penalty on Joe Flacco for roughing the passer. The calls went both ways. There shouldn't even be a debate about Terrell Suggs' penalty.

Ummm...Terrell Suggs alleged penalty.

Assuming you are a Cheatriots fan who sees absolutely nothing wrong with the "Roughing the Brady" penalty call, and assuming that you actually watch other games besides the Pats*, you may have noticed no less than 7 other hits on QBs who aren't named Marsha Brady that actually warranted a Roughing call that didn't get it. You would have also noticed that not one of those other QBs not named Marsha stood up after being slammed into the turf (rather than brushed lightly) and petitioned the Ref for the Yellow flag.

He is a disgrace to the game---even his own teammate called him out

I hate the Ravens and actually wanted them to lose because it helped the Steelers, but

C'mon Man!

MasterOfPuppets
10-06-2009, 03:10 PM
even wilbon on PTI said brady and manning get calls other qb's don't get.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:11 PM
Alleged? There is no "alleged". It was a penalty, and rightfully called.

I really don't care about other games or QBs. In THIS game, the penalties were called both ways. Both Mike Wright and the Ravens player (can't remember who it was) brushed the opposing QBs on the helmet. Both were flagged. the referees were consistent for this game.

Perhaps you didn't get the memo that Rodney Harrison was joking when he "called Brady out".

Indo
10-06-2009, 03:13 PM
You may wish to actually familiarize yourself with the Official Rules as well:

Protection of Passer
By interpretation, a pass begins when the passer -- with possession of ball -- starts to bring his hand forward. If ball strikes ground after this action has begun, play is ruled an incomplete pass. If passer loses control of ball prior to his bringing his hand forward, play is ruled a fumble.
When a passer is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his arm starts a forward pass. If a defensive player contacts the passer or the ball after forward movement begins, and the ball leaves the passer’s hand, a forward pass is ruled, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground or a player.
No defensive player may run into a passer of a legal forward pass after the ball has left his hand (15 yards). The Referee must determine whether opponent had a reasonable chance to stop his momentum during an attempt to block the pass or tackle the passer while he still had the ball.
No defensive player who has an unrestricted path to the quarterback may hit him flagrantly in the area of the knee(s) or below when approaching in any direction.
Officials are to blow the play dead as soon as the quarterback is clearly in the grasp and control of any tackler, and his safety is in jeopardy.



http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/protectionofpasser


Check out the bolded section----and apply it to the Suggs call

Suggs was pushed into Marsha----the Ref should have determined that the player (Suggs) did not have a reasonable chance to stop his momentum based on this rule. Brady made the decidsion for him

Also---the NEW rule (which is not yet referenced on the NFL website) states that the Refs are to throw flags when the defensive player Intentionally tries to hurt the QB . Now I will be the first to admit that trying to determine a Defensive player's intention in the heat of a play is exceedingly difficult, but I will also submit to you that (If anything) Suggs was INTENTIONALLY trying to avoid Marsha's legs. Go watch the video--I'm sure it's on YouTube by now

Also----we understand team loyalty and whatnot, but don't be a Homer. It's detrimental to the Greatest Game on the Planet

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:26 PM
Koppen's hands were off of Suggs a few yards before Suggs even dove towards Brady. And those are the key words, he dove in the direction of Brady. He wasn't pushed. He could have easily gone in the other direction and missed Brady entirely.

The Referee must determine whether opponent had a reasonable chance to stop his momentum during an attempt to block the pass or tackle the passer while he still had the ball.

He had more than a reasonable chance.

fansince'76
10-06-2009, 03:27 PM
Go watch the video--I'm sure it's on YouTube by now

It is:

HnmGSMccDuU

Indo
10-06-2009, 03:34 PM
Koppen's hands were off of Suggs a few yards before Suggs even dove towards Brady. And those are the key words, he dove in the direction of Brady. He wasn't pushed. He could have easily gone in the other direction and missed Brady entirely.


I beg to differ---
He FELL in the direction of Brady. Off Balance.

And unless the Rules of Gravity don't apply in Foxboro (perhaps they don't--Goodell might have changed those rules, too, for the Benefit of His Golden Boy) it's Very difficult to STOP falling once you are in motion to fall. Either the Rules of Gravity don't apply, or Suggs finds a way to change direction in mid-fall. Which would you prefer?

And why don't the Rules (of Roughing the Passer) apply anywhere except in Foxboro?

Suggs actions were NOT intentional. He had no reasonable chance to stop his momentum (as the rule states). Period. You're just kidding yourself if you see it ANY other way.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 03:36 PM
Alleged? There is no "alleged". It was a penalty, and rightfully called.

I really don't care about other games or QBs. In THIS game, the penalties were called both ways. Both Mike Wright and the Ravens player (can't remember who it was) brushed the opposing QBs on the helmet. Both were flagged. the referees were consistent for this game.

Perhaps you didn't get the memo that Rodney Harrison was joking when he "called Brady out".

NO perhaps you'd like to share that memo. Although I doubt you will since he was dead serious.

If you honestly believe it's legit then why are you here trying to validate it? Your little Brady is a pampered, whiney bitch.

You cannot throw a flag for "brushing" the QB's legs. More times than not, the flags in a game w/ the Patriots are one sided. You're team hasn't earned a fricking thing since 1996! If it's not cheating it's help from the refs. Brady wasn't doing squat in those drives until he got the calls that went his way.

Two years ago the whole world finally got to see what happens when the refs aren't in New Englands pocket and it looked something like this:

http://cache.deadspin.com/assets/resources/2008/02/giantscatch.jpg

and this:

http://www.mujahideenryder.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/david-tyree-superbowl-42.jpg

and this:

http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/0827/nfl_g_brady_580.jpg

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:39 PM
"I was joking about it," Harrison said to me in an early-morning phone call. "I called Tom before halftime and told him I was going to go after him a little bit so he knew about it. He was fine with it. I would never question his toughness. He's a Hall of Fame quarterback and he's one of my best friends. It was tongue-in-cheek."

Dead serious, huh?

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:41 PM
And why don't the Rules (of Roughing the Passer) apply anywhere except in Foxboro?

Apparently they apply to Buffalo, seeing as how the Bills have gotten more roughing the passer calls in their favor compared to the Patriots.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:43 PM
Suggs easily could have avoided Brady if he wanted. Instead he chose to dive in Brady's direction, and was rightfully flagged. Like I said, this should not even be a discussion. It's right there in that youtube clip.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 03:44 PM
Koppen's hands were off of Suggs a few yards before Suggs even dove towards Brady. And those are the key words, he dove in the direction of Brady. He wasn't pushed. He could have easily gone in the other direction and missed Brady entirely.



He had more than a reasonable chance.

He did? Why are you wasting our time with your homer physics? And he STILL can't throw a flag if the QB wasn't even hit!

You can't judge a players intentions, otherwise we wouldn't have as many helmet-to-helmet calls. That said, even if Suggs TRIED to willingly end Tom Brady's career, he didn't hit him. Do you throw a flag because a player meant to or tried to hold a defender??? No. You throw the flag when the player is held.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 03:45 PM
Dead serious, huh?

:link:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:46 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/10/05/harrison-says-brady-knew-the-jab-was-coming/

fansince'76
10-06-2009, 03:47 PM
:link:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/10/05/harrison-says-brady-knew-the-jab-was-coming/

I think this dude has cribbed his whole spiel here from Curran. :rolleyes:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:50 PM
That said, even if Suggs TRIED to willingly end Tom Brady's career, he didn't hit him. Do you throw a flag because a player meant to or tried to hold a defender??? No. You throw the flag when the player is held.

Also---the NEW rule (which is not yet referenced on the NFL website) states that the Refs are to throw flags when the defensive player Intentionally tries to hurt the QB .

According to this, you can.

Indo
10-06-2009, 03:50 PM
Apparently they apply to Buffalo, seeing as how the Bills have gotten more roughing the passer calls in their favor compared to the Patriots.

Now there's Logic at its best:

The Bills have gotten more calls for Roughing the Passer than the Pats*, THEREFORE the calls that the Pats* have gotten are Legitimate.

Sorry. Doesn't fly.


And maybe Harrison doesn't have the testicular fortitude to stand up to Marsha about what he said, so he had to essentially retract it; but why is EVERY sportscaster in the country questioning the call? In fact, everybody who is a fan of any team whose name is not followed by an asterisk is questioning the call.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 03:51 PM
Now there's Logic at its best:

The Bills have gotten more calls for Roughing the Passer than the Pats*, THEREFORE the calls that the Pats* have gotten are Legitimate.

Sorry. Doesn't fly.

Except that wasn't your argument. You said the rules of roughing the passer don't apply anywhere except Foxboro. I just showed you that they do.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 03:59 PM
Also---the NEW rule (which is not yet referenced on the NFL website) states that the Refs are to throw flags when the defensive player Intentionally tries to hurt the QB .

According to this, you can.

Where does it end? :rolleyes: According to that ....my ass!
And you think that diving NEXT TO the QB's legs or even brushing them constitutes enforcement of this rule? Typical New England mentality.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 04:01 PM
but why is EVERY sportscaster in the country questioning the call? In fact, everybody who is a fan of any team whose name is not followed by an asterisk is questioning the call.

I don't think too many are really questioning the Suggs cheap shot, I think it's more the brush against the helmet. But like I said, it was also called against Mike Wright. I'm fine with it if it's called both ways.

What I find more interesting is why these sportscasters don't mention that at all. Both teams were called for that penalty.

stlrtruck
10-06-2009, 04:05 PM
I don't think too many are really questioning the Suggs cheap shot, I think it's more the brush against the helmet. But like I said, it was also called against Mike Wright. I'm fine with it if it's called both ways.

What I find more interesting is why these sportscasters don't mention that at all. Both teams were called for that penalty.

Their constant knob slobbing of Marsha's genitalia prevent them from saying anything negative about brady, belicheat, or the patriots*, but seeing as your obviously a homer :troll: I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

I'm sure you were just elated when the flag was thrown for that "intentional" roughing the passer. Interesting enough brady is finally being called out for being the woman he is, and his only answer to pump his fist when he gets a panty waist call like that.

What's next he'll be calling for pass interference when his WRs aren't allowed to catch the ball? Oh wait, he already expects that too!

Gaist
10-06-2009, 04:08 PM
Their constant knob slobbing of Marsha's genitalia prevent them from saying anything negative about brady, belicheat, or the patriots*, but seeing as your obviously a homer :troll: I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

You should probably reread my post. I said why isn't anyone mentioning Mike Wright (a Patriot) being called for the same roughing the passer call as a Raven was.

If they were "knob slobbing" New England, it would be mentioned even more than the penalties called on the Ravens.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 04:12 PM
You should probably reread my post. I said why isn't anyone mentioning Mike Wright (a Patriot) being called for the same roughing the passer call as a Raven was.

If they were "knob slobbing" New England, it would be mentioned even more than the penalties called on the Ravens.

Why are you here arguing this with us? You should be here: http://boards.baltimoreravens.com/ arguing it with them.

And the "knob slobbing" is not limited to the Patriots/Ravens game. It's the Patriots/(insert suckers here) game.

fansince'76
10-06-2009, 04:16 PM
Why are you here arguing this with us?

Because that's their MO - they trawl the web looking for any slight (real or perceived) against the bestest, most wonderfulest franchise in the universe to bitch about and argue over.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 04:26 PM
Because that's their MO - they trawl the web looking for any slight (real or perceived) against the bestest, most wonderfulest franchise in the universe to bitch about and argue over.

I frequent the Ravens forum (bunch of good folks actually) and no Patriots fan dared to enter there after that game. And I am NOT exaggerating. Go figure.

I forget who said it (Revs?) but I agree that these poor turds have gotten themselves gyped out of the REAL NFL experience: Winning and losing legitimately. They've been spoiled by a cheeating coach and immediately rescued by a soft, money hungry, rule munipulating commissioner.

We need FT refs. Bring back Red Cashion!!!! :chuckle:
https://www.eofficials.com/ESO_Repository/Content/ContentImages/ESO%20Crew%20Members/pic_RedCashion.jpg

MasterOfPuppets
10-06-2009, 04:43 PM
as a fan i'd be to embarrassed to defend those BS calls....but then again if i stood behind a bunch of pathetic cheats i guess i wouldn't have much honor as a person to admit the flagarent favoritism shown by the scumbags that are ruining the league. :popcorn:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 04:53 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the "flagrant favoritism" is. Suggs cleary dove at Brady, and the roughing the passer helmet brushed was called on both sides.

Apparently Ed Reed complained about the spot on the fourth down of the next to last Ravens drive. If you watch it for 5 seconds you can see that the Ravens were actually given a better spot than they should have. Either way it wasn't close.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 05:18 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the "flagrant favoritism" is. Really? because it's right here:

Suggs cleary dove at Brady

No he didn't and only you patriots fans and that officiating crew think so.

If you're still confused about the favoritism, ask yourself how many QB's suffered knee injuries in the exact same fashion bitch-ass did (see Kimo vonOelhoffen/Carson Palmer -or- Luis Castillo/Ben Roethlisberger for starters).
Then tell me why it wasn't until bitch-ass got it that there was a rule change.

Fa, Fa, Fa, FAVORITISM. :doh:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 07:06 PM
If you're still confused about the favoritism, ask yourself how many QB's suffered knee injuries in the exact same fashion bitch-ass did (see Kimo vonOelhoffen/Carson Palmer -or- Luis Castillo/Ben Roethlisberger for starters).
Then tell me why it wasn't until bitch-ass got it that there was a rule change.

I thought it was already illegal to go low on a QB? Brady's rule is when the defender is on the ground, they can't drive their shoulder into the QBs legs. Suggs was still standing when he tried to cheap shot Brady.

I don't remember the Roethlisberger injury, but Kimo was not on the ground when he hit Palmer.

The Patriot
10-06-2009, 07:08 PM
Because that's their MO - they trawl the web looking for any slight (real or perceived) against the bestest, most wonderfulest franchise in the universe to bitch about and argue over.

And, yet, you choose to deal with our nonsense rather than venture into the 'Fire Arians' and 'Bench Mendenhall' threads.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 07:20 PM
I thought it was already illegal to go low on a QB? Brady's rule is when the defender is on the ground, they can't drive their shoulder into the QBs legs. Suggs was still standing when he tried to cheap shot Brady.

I don't remember the Roethlisberger injury, but Kimo was not on the ground when he hit Palmer.

Brady's, Roethlisbergers and Palmers were all the same from the defenders standpoint: The defender was falling and gave it the extra little "umph" to get at him before he threw the ball.
The Suggs thing on Sunday though, Suggs didn't "try" to do anything (Wrap up, or intentionally hit Tom) and Tom easily slid out of the way.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 07:21 PM
And, yet, you choose to deal with our nonsense rather than venture into the 'Fire Arians' and 'Bench Mendenhall' threads.

We have a 10% that are ... "That type" of fan. You guys have a 10% who are not. :chuckle:

Crow-Magnon
10-06-2009, 07:24 PM
Wow! Leave it to a Cheatriot fan to bring Ravens & Steelers' fans together.

Without his protectors, Marsha wouldn't survive playing in the AFC North against Baltimore & Pittsburgh defenses 2 games each.

Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

:rofl:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 07:28 PM
Brady's, Roethlisbergers and Palmers were all the same from the defenders standpoint: The defender was falling and gave it the extra little "umph" to get at him before he threw the ball.
The Suggs thing on Sunday though, Suggs didn't "try" to do anything (Wrap up, or intentionally hit Tom) and Tom easily slid out of the way.

Pollard was not falling, he was already on the ground several seconds when he hit Brady.

Crow-Magnon
10-06-2009, 07:30 PM
Pollard was not falling, he was already on the ground several seconds when he hit Brady.

So I guess he should stay on the ground and let the QB throw a TD?

Is this NFL football we're talking about? Seriously?

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 07:36 PM
Pollard was not falling, he was already on the ground several seconds when he hit Brady.

Brady had the freaking ball. Pollard QUITE NATURALLY (as a defender and all) tried to take him down which is EXACTLY what Kimo and Luis Castillo tried to do. Don't gimme that "on the ground" crap. First it was the "Tuck rule" and now we have to endure "on the F**KING ground too?????"

It's football and your stinkin organization, between tuck rules, spy-gate and new rules every time a Patsie gets hurt, are ruining it! :banging:

Why is it always some BS when it comes to every Patriot game???

The Patriot
10-06-2009, 07:37 PM
So I guess he should stay on the ground and let the QB throw a TD?


:yep:

I think that would be best for all of us.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 07:37 PM
So I guess he should stay on the ground and let the QB throw a TD?

Is this NFL football we're talking about? Seriously?

THANK YOU!!!! :banging:

Judas H. Priest! I'm about to blow a gasket on this guy Crow. :mad:

Crow-Magnon
10-06-2009, 07:40 PM
THANK YOU!!!! :banging:

Judas H. Priest! I'm about to blow a gasket on this guy Crow. :mad:

It's quite simple.

There's the NFL....and the Patriots. Get it now? :banging:

X-Terminator
10-06-2009, 07:45 PM
Figures we'd get another Pats* fan here trying to defend the indefensible. There is very little question that Marsha and the Pats* get preferential treatment from the refs. Think Ben would have gotten that call? No. Why? Because unlike Princess Brady, Ben doesn't wear a skirt. Neither does Flacco, or Rivers, or any other QB with some testicular fortitude.

And I don't want to hear "oh, well they called it against the other guys, so that right there shows there's no favoritism." Bullshit. Anyone who isn't drinking the RW&B Kool-Aid can clearly see that there is. I mean hell, we have Ravens fans here who admitted that they didn't believe it until they saw it with their own eyes.

Hey Gaist, whenever I start seeing Ben get RTP calls against him when the situation absolutely calls for it, or gets calls like that after whining to the refs for a flag (something he very rarely does, BTW, again, because he's not a gaping mangina like the Princess), then we can talk. Until then, you can kindly go piss up a rope.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 07:48 PM
:yep:

I think that would be best for all of us.

Reminds me of "Ramon" (Eddie Murphy) from Beverly Hills Cop:

Ramon: "Please tell Victor that Ramon, the fella he met last week, went to the clinic today and I found out that I have herpes simplex 10 .. and I think that Victor should go see his physician before things start falling off on the man."

Maître d': "Perhaps you should tell him that yourself."

Ramon: "You know, I think that would be best." :sissies:

:chuckle:

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:01 PM
So I guess he should stay on the ground and let the QB throw a TD?

Is this NFL football we're talking about? Seriously?

No, but he can try tackling him by the waist instead of lunging at his knees.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:04 PM
And I don't want to hear "oh, well they called it against the other guys, so that right there shows there's no favoritism."

Of course you don't want to hear it, because it disproves what you're whining about in the first place.

The Patriot
10-06-2009, 08:06 PM
No, but he can try tackling him by the waist instead of lunging at his knees.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

http://dejbob1.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/beerwithasmile.jpg.w300h370.jpg

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:11 PM
No, but he can try tackling him by the waist instead of lunging at his knees.

Won't work. We get penalized on those too.

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/12/04/6xlee_patriotssteelers10_spts__1228443821_7319.jpg

How 'bout if Brady just stuck to tennis? :noidea:

X-Terminator
10-06-2009, 08:17 PM
Of course you don't want to hear it, because it disproves what you're whining about in the first place.

No, actually it doesn't, not when there's clear evidence to the contrary. If you'd take off your effing homer goggles for a second, you'd see that. All you're doing is trying to pull an Officer Barbrady here, and it ain't going to work. There is not much question that Marsha gets calls that other QBs do not get. Fans and media outside of New Cheatland* acknowledge this. Why can't you? Nevermind, I already know the answer.

Crow-Magnon
10-06-2009, 08:21 PM
No, but he can try tackling him by the waist instead of lunging at his knees.

Christ, that's so stupid it defies description. The defender is knocked to the ground. He looks up, the QB is there, so instead of reaching and grabbing/hitting what he can (at the level he is at), he's supposed to get up to at least waist level?

What's next? You can't slap the QB's instep to trip him up because he needs those feet to drop back in the pocket or scramble?

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:29 PM
Christ, that's so stupid it defies description. The defender is knocked to the ground. He looks up, the QB is there, so instead of reaching and grabbing/hitting what he can (at the level he is at), he's supposed to get up to at least waist level?

What's next? You can't slap the QB's instep to trip him up because he needs those feet to drop back in the pocket or scramble?

You forgot to mention that the Tackle, Guard or Center is allowed to keep him from getting up.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:30 PM
Christ, that's so stupid it defies description. The defender is knocked to the ground. He looks up, the QB is there, so instead of reaching and grabbing/hitting what he can (at the level he is at), he's supposed to get up to at least waist level?

What's next? You can't slap the QB's instep to trip him up because he needs those feet to drop back in the pocket or scramble?

This isn't hard to comprehend. You can't hit QBs in the helmet, and you can't go after their knees. Brady is not a small guy. He's 6'5. There's plenty of torso to hit.

You guys keep saying Brady gets calls that other QBs don't, but Flacco got the exact same call. And if a Patriot dove at Flacco's knee, I'd expect a penalty.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:36 PM
Refs giving Pats' Tom Brady special treatment?
By Mark Miller

Baltimore Ravens coach John Harbaugh seems to think that New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady(notes) is getting special treatment from the refs. He believes it so much that he is reportedly going to submit film to the NFL to prove his point, according to the Boston Globe.

Harbaugh apparently thinks that Brady was treated better by the refs than his own quarterback, Joe Flacco(notes), was during the Ravens' 27-21 loss on Sunday. He seems to think that the Ravens got called on penalties whenever Brady got touched while any Patriot-to-Flacco hits went unnoticed by the refs.

Two Patriots touchdowns in the first half occurred after a roughing-the-passer penalty against the Ravens help set things up for New England. The officiating crew for the game on Sunday is apparently known for calling a lot of penalties, but that seemed to work against the Ravens.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rumors/post/Refs-giving-Pats-Tom-Brady-special-treatment-?urn=nfl,194266


Although I doubt the league will do a darn thing, I'm glad Harbaugh is following through. I would hope Tomlin would do the same thing. I know Cowher would.

tony hipchest
10-06-2009, 08:39 PM
This isn't hard to comprehend. You can't hit QBs in the helmet, and you can't go after their knees. Brady is not a small guy. He's 6'5. There's plenty of torso to hit.

You guys keep saying Brady gets calls that other QBs don't, but Flacco got the exact same call. And if a Patriot dove at Flacco's knee, I'd expect a penalty.yes you can. it happens all the time to big ben.

during the entire span of his career, ben's opponents have been called for a late hit/flagrant foul about 3 times.

brady has received the happy tissue 3 times in the last 2 weeks alone (and countless times before that).

now take into consideration that ben has easilly been sacked more than 100 times more than brady in the past 5 years, and hit or knocked down probably another 100 times.

you dont see the discretion?

then you are phucking blind. :cool:

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:39 PM
This isn't hard to comprehend. You can't hit QBs in the helmet, and you can't go after their knees [Only since "The Brady" got hurt]. Brady is not a small guy. He's 6'5. There's plenty of torso to hit.

You guys keep saying Brady gets calls that other QBs don't, but Flacco got the exact same call. And if a Patriot dove at Flacco's knee, I'd expect a penalty.

Again, this last game isn't the first time. The Ravens are not the only team complaining.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:43 PM
Tony, Ben's been sacked many more times for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if the hits and knockdowns aren't that far off between Brady and Roethlisberger.

TheWarden, the Brady rule has to do when they're on the ground. I don't think they could go for the QBs knees even before Brady got hurt.

Crow-Magnon
10-06-2009, 08:45 PM
Although I doubt the league will do a darn thing, I'm glad Harbaugh is following through. I would hope Tomlin would do the same thing. I know Cowher would.

Speaking of Harbaugh, have you EVER seen a HC get a 15 yard PF penalty? What is this, the NBA? Did he draw a technical?

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:48 PM
Tony, Ben's been sacked many more times for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if the hits and knockdowns aren't that far off between Brady and Roethlisberger.

TheWarden, the Brady rule has to do when they're on the ground. I don't think they could go for the QBs knees even before Brady got hurt.

Yet they did get hit in the knees and it never drew a flag, fine, suspension, rule change or national attention.

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 08:49 PM
Speaking of Harbaugh, have you EVER seen a HC get a 15 yard PF penalty? What is this, the NBA? Did he draw a technical?

I haven't seen it, but I heard Schottenheimer say it happened to him .... in a playoff game in Cleveland.

....WHOA!!! Did I just say "Playoff game in Cleveland?" Shit! I said it again! Going for the mouthwash now....

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:52 PM
I don't think the Ravens have ever "really" lost a game. It's bad luck, bad officiating, bad weather, bad food eaten before the game. They're the Phil Hellmuth of football.

Gaist
10-06-2009, 08:58 PM
3 roughing the passer penalties have been called for New England, and 3 have been called against them. Boy, that's some flagrant favoritism.

tony hipchest
10-06-2009, 09:06 PM
Tony, Ben's been sacked many more times for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if the hits and knockdowns aren't that far off between Brady and Roethlisberger.
.which is really irrelevant. if the hits and knockdowns arent that far off between the two, then why are the amounts of flags thrown?

this isnt make believe.

it isnt conspiracy theory.

its not pure hate on your player.

be honest with yourself and think of how many times an opponent has been flagged for roughing brady in his past 5 complete seasons of play.

compare that to bens measly 3 or 4.

something is wrong, or as those in new england would say "something is afoot".

tony hipchest
10-06-2009, 09:30 PM
on wrights 2nd sack of flacco, it looks like his forearm grazed flaccos facemask. why wasnt that called a penalty?

NJarhead
10-06-2009, 09:42 PM
Tom Brady Draws Emotionally Roughing The Passer Penalty


http://7.media.collegehumor.com/collegehumor/sportspickle/b/b/sportspickle.69fe7fdb88a4673efb37acabede624fa.jpg
Baltimore Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs was flagged for emotionally roughing Patriots quarterback Tom Brady yesterday after a hit left the star quarterback feeling upset and unloved.

"I didn't care for that! I didn't care for that one bit!" snapped Brady, stomping his foot as he pulled himself up off the ground. Moments later, official Tom Winter threw a flag, penalizing Suggs and the Ravens for an infraction never before called in organized football.

"The new rules in place make our job very clear as officials," said Winter, explaining his call. "We are to protect the quarterback, especially star quarterbacks, and especially this star quarterback. Brady's injury last year is what prompted all of these rule changes."

Brady says Winter made the right call.

"I don't think people understand how hard it is to be me. I'm coming back from a knee injury, my team is struggling, I have one child out of wedlock, another child on the way, very high-maintenance dogs to take care of, I'm expected to look stylish all the time and I have the stress of physically satisfying a woman millions of men around the world would love a shot at. And then when someone tackles me, well ..." he said, tearing up. "It can be very, very hard, okay? It can be very hard on my psyche."

Suggs said he had no intention of emotionally harming Brady, only sacking him and maybe creating a turnover.

"I wasn't trying to emotionally rough the guy," said Suggs. "Physically harming him would have been awesome, but all that touchy-feely emotional crap is what's killing football. I just wanted to maim the guy."

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell says he will examine the emotionally roughing the quarterback call and evaluate how it should be called in the future.

http://www.sportspickle.com/article:261/tom-brady-draws-emotionally-roughing-the-passer-penalty


Gee, now I kinda feel bad for him. *barf*

:chuckle:

The Patriot
10-06-2009, 11:15 PM
Greg Easterbrook knows his rules.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091006&sportCat=nfl

Sweet 'N' Sour Play: Trailing New England 3-0 and facing a third-and-4, Baltimore came out with an unbalanced line left and a trips left. Then a man went in motion right. Joe Flacco play-faked to the tailback running right, then threw a hitch screen back left -- first down and a touchdown on the possession. So the play looked to the defense like a heavy overload left that was really going to be a run right, but the ball ended up back on the overload side -- sweet. What was sour? Baltimore offensive tackle Michael Oher was 3 yards downfield when the catch was made; the play should have been called back. :jawdrop:(So Baltimore, the officials don't always favor New England; see below.)

http://irldefender.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/crying-baby.jpg

tony hipchest
10-06-2009, 11:42 PM
what... you couldnt find a mike reiss, apologist piece, to post?

:hunch:

(cute baby BTW... shoulda been dressed in pink to celebrate the occasion though)

X-Terminator
10-06-2009, 11:43 PM
which is really irrelevant. if the hits and knockdowns arent that far off between the two, then why are the amounts of flags thrown?

this isnt make believe.

it isnt conspiracy theory.

its not pure hate on your player.

be honest with yourself and think of how many times an opponent has been flagged for roughing brady in his past 5 complete seasons of play.

compare that to bens measly 3 or 4.

something is wrong, or as those in new england would say "something is afoot".

Let's just look at last year alone - Ben was probably hit at least 4 or 5 times that could have and should have drawn a flag, the most blatant being the hit by Shaun Rogers when he drove him into the turf. Lamarr Woodley and James Harrison both got called for that last year. There were another 4 or 5 times where he had the same "helmet tap" that Ngata got flagged for, and I don't remember a single flag being thrown. And I still can't get over the Atlanta game in 2006 when Ben clearly was hit with a helmet-to-helmet shot and no penalty was called. I guarantee you in at least 90% of those instances, if it were Princess Brady on the receiving end, not only would the player get flagged, but he'd probably get fined and/or suspended for daring to hit "The Golden One." :jerkit:

tony hipchest
10-07-2009, 12:16 AM
oh yeah! :doh:

the hit that led ben being strapped to a stretcher and hauled of the field with a bruise to his spinal cord, right before a SB WINNING playoff run???

i forgot about that one.

the members of the apologist pink pansy patriot protector patrol are amusing if nothing else.

good thing is, steeler nation (and just about everybody else) represents the "keep it real" brigade.

fansince'76
10-07-2009, 07:54 AM
And, yet, you choose to deal with our nonsense rather than venture into the 'Fire Arians' and 'Bench Mendenhall' threads.

As opposed to making a pest of myself on another team's board. Your act is beyond old. As I've said before, if I wasn't a mod and basically forced to read your apologist drivel, I would've put you on ignore well over a year ago.

The Patriot
10-07-2009, 08:16 AM
As opposed to making a pest of myself on another team's board. Your act is beyond old. As I've said before, if I wasn't a mod and basically forced to read your apologist drivel, I would've put you on ignore well over a year ago.

Wouldn't hold it against you, but in the mean time we got a sitcom.

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 09:16 AM
Wouldn't hold it against you, but in the mean time we got a sitcom.

Yea, and we'll call it "Saved by the (flag)." You're Screech.

Hammer Of The GODS
10-07-2009, 09:25 AM
It is pointless to argue with the stupid and the ignorant because they try to bring you down to thier level where they will beat you with experience!




.

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 10:08 AM
Perhaps I wasn't clear...allow me to make myself CRYSTAL clear on this.

Football has been around for 116 years. The game was fine for 113 of those without over-the-top "helicopter QB" rules. The came the Carson Cry Baby rule, which was already TOO much. Point being, there was already a rule in place that put too much of a protective halo around QB's to begin with.

Then came the Brady Baby Rule. This essentially leaves it up to the refs in a completely subjective fashion to determine defensive players intent. That's nonsense. So, now, essentially any time Brady is touched, there's a goodly chance a ref will toss a flag for roughing, simply because it's Brady.

My problem is with the rule itself. It sucks. It's stupid. It IS favoritism, and it IS being called to protect one QB more than other QB's. Brady chose to play QB in the NFL. QB's are exposed, and have been for 116 years. Perhaps, if he's overly concerned about getting hurt again, he should retire, or take up tennis, but if he's in the NFL he should have to play by the EXISTING rules, not have new rules made up to cater just to him.

By the by, his stats are WAY down this year in some key categories, which is further evidence that the natural leveling of the field (i.e. Belichick not knowing the opposing teams defense) is catching up to the Pats*, and in particular, the "Golden One". He's an above average QB at best who benefited from the dual advantages of a QB friendly system and an unprecedented system of cheating the depths of which will never truly be known (although statistical evidence may be emerging to shed a little light on that subject.)

While Brady has the most completions, he also has the most attempts, and he's 15th in completion percentage (which REALLY sucks because all he throws is short passes, and he's 28th in the league in yards per catch to prove that). 17th QBR.

He still has decent stats in yards/games and overall yardage, but his TD's are way off previous form. Dude is in the most QB friendly system in the league, and his numbers are slipping. This is further evidence that he needs ALL the officiating help he can get, and it's evident that the NFL is acutely aware of this.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 10:15 AM
By the by, his stats are WAY down this year in some key categories, which is further evidence that the natural leveling of the field (i.e. Belichick not knowing the opposing teams defense) is catching up to the Pats.

Or, you know, it could be because he was injured in 2008 and was out for a whole season.

I've already responded to a similar post of yours like this, but Brady at his best threw 28 touchdowns, and about 4100 yards, and maybe a 64 percent completion percentage?

Then, "not knowing the opposing teams defense", he throws for 50 touchdowns, 4800 yards, and a 68 percent completion percentage.

Exactly what is so QB friendly about New England? I wasn't aware that they were the only team that has good receivers.

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 10:26 AM
Look at the average yards per completion...when a QB is asked to only throw high percentage dink-and-dunk passes, that will certainly inflate certain stat lines.

I also do NOT believe that the fruits of Spygate had rotted on the vine in his record-setting year, in fact, that was probably the year they bore a record crop. I don't believe Belichick can win in the NFL without cheating. He began taping (and whatever other unknown methods of stealing opposing teams plays) in his SECOND year at NE, and his 41-55 record prior to that turned around quickly.

Last year was legit, but was also the product of an easy schedule. He also has some quality talent and quite a few impact players.

Dino 6 Rings
10-07-2009, 11:51 AM
I wanted the Pats to win...for the record...it knocked Baltimore down a peg and puts us into a better position to win the division.

Now I have no idea who I need to win the Bengals vs Ravens game. Probably the Ravens, so the Bengals get an in Division Loss. Then we can still win the North when we Win out the rest of the AFC Games on our Schedule.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 01:06 PM
I also do NOT believe that the fruits of Spygate had rotted on the vine in his record-setting year, in fact, that was probably the year they bore a record crop.

Those must have been some magical signals they taped against the Jets. Not only did it help them beat the Jets, but it somehow helped them beat 6 playoff teams that same year (including the Chargers twice).

Having never even thrown 30 touchdowns, Brady suddenly throws 50 and averages over 300 yards per game.

The_WARDen
10-07-2009, 01:18 PM
Those must have been some magical signals they taped against the Jets. Not only did it help them beat the Jets, but it somehow helped them beat 6 playoff teams that same year (including the Chargers twice).

Having never even thrown 30 touchdowns, Brady suddenly throws 50 and averages over 300 yards per game.

It was either videotaping or steroids...take your pick.

:popcorn:

Indo
10-07-2009, 01:18 PM
Those must have been some magical signals they taped against the Jets. Not only did it help them beat the Jets, but it somehow helped them beat 6 playoff teams that same year (including the Chargers twice).

Having never even thrown 30 touchdowns, Brady suddenly throws 50 and averages over 300 yards per game.

Dude,
(may I call you Dude?)

Your Team Cheated. Period.
It adds an Asterisk to any and ALL accomplishments (including the rings) forever more.

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 02:13 PM
I never limited my accusations to signals. I also believe they stole opposing teams playbooks, attempted (and probably on occasions were successful) to steal radio signals, and there are probably more things they did that we will never know, since it would place the NFL in a highly untenable position for anyone to ever discover how deep the rabbit hole actually went.

Interesting that you bring up Brady's #'s for that year...thank you, as that definitely contributes to my argument. You take an above average QB, place him in a dink and dunk offense and let him know what the defense is running (which opens up the occasional long ball), and you can make him look BETTER than the truly great legitimate QB's.

All the benefits of Spygate now being exhausted, his projected stats interestingly seem much more pedestrian for this year:
Let's compare and contrast:

2009 projected versus 2007 "artificially enhanced" stats (denoted by *)

2009 QBR: 83.7
* 117.2

2009 Pass yards: 4516 (the only stat that's comparable, although there is a logical explanation for this)
* 4806

2009 Attempts 696 (part of the explanation for all the projected yardage)
* 578

2009 completions: 432 (see above)
* 398

2009 %: 62.9 (Nearly Kordell-like given the high percentage nature of the NE pass game)
* 68.9

2009 TD's: 16
* 50


This all equates to a "smoking gun" of circumstantial evidence, which would lead any sane and logical person to at least entertain the notion that perhaps there's some real fire in all this smoke, yet the NE faithful (both the few legitimate long-term fans and the vast swells of bandwagon hoppers) refuse to acknowledge that ANY of this can possibly be real and true, and I've even see some of them, in a beautiful display of revisionist history gerrymandering, claim that Spygate itself had no merit, and was simply part of a "Vast anti-Patriot conspiracy".

The_WARDen
10-07-2009, 02:21 PM
Wow! Only 63% comp percent with 90% of his passes being 5 yards dink routes to Welker?

:toofunny:

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 02:23 PM
Those must have been some magical signals they taped against the Jets. Not only did it help them beat the Jets, but it somehow helped them beat 6 playoff teams that same year (including the Chargers twice).

Having never even thrown 30 touchdowns, Brady suddenly throws 50 and averages over 300 yards per game.

Patriots were a great team in 2007 with the addition of Randy Moss and Wes Welker. But for the first time since no longer having video tape, you LOST a close one in the SB. Bilicheat didn't have that illegal advantage that he's used to providing his team with. Plus, if not for some untimely timeouts, a young QB here or there and plenty of help from the refs (and ONE blown coverage on the Giants), you guys are very much 13-3 in 2007 rather than 18-DOH!

three SB's won by a combined 9 pts. If not for video tape, the Eagles and Panthers would likely have won each their first SB and the Steelers would have likely played the Rams in 2001 (we actually lost that game on special teams and a late pick). I can only imagine what we would have done if you didn't have all our signals on both offense and defense.

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 02:35 PM
His career average yards per catch is only 7.2...nothing will ever be able to change that and what it implies.

He's an above average QB made to look elite with the aid of some invaluable advantages that only the Patriots can provide.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 02:41 PM
I never limited my accusations to signals. I also believe they stole opposing teams playbooks, attempted (and probably on occasions were successful) to steal radio signals, and there are probably more things they did that we will never know, since it would place the NFL in a highly untenable position for anyone to ever discover how deep the rabbit hole actually went.

I don't think they stole playbooks, but I don't think that's even illegal. I have heard of other teams going through the trash of the opposing teams after games looking for anything they can find.

More things they did? Name one you think they might have done.

Interesting that you bring up Brady's #'s for that year...thank you, as that definitely contributes to my argument.

It hurts your argument. If they stole signals from 2000 on, how does Brady go from at most having 28 touchdowns during those years, to all of a sudden not having the signals and then breaking the touchdown record?

You take an above average QB, place him in a dink and dunk offense and let him know what the defense is running (which opens up the occasional long ball), and you can make him look BETTER than the truly great legitimate QB's.

So now he's above average? I thought he was no better than Matt Cassel? Plus, he averaged over 12 yards per reception in 2007. That doesn't qualify as dink and dunk to me.

All the benefits of Spygate now being exhausted, his projected stats interestingly seem much more pedestrian for this year:
Let's compare and contrast:

2009 projected versus 2007 "artificially enhanced" stats (denoted by *)

Where are his 2008 stats? Maybe you didn't read it the first time I posted it, but he missed all but about 7 minutes of 2008 with a serious knee injury. That might play into why he's not on the tear he was in 2007.

This all equates to a "smoking gun" of circumstantial evidence, which would lead any sane and logical person to at least entertain the notion that perhaps there's some real fire in all this smoke, yet the NE faithful (both the few legitimate long-term fans and the vast swells of bandwagon hoppers) refuse to acknowledge that ANY of this can possibly be real and true, and I've even see some of them, in a beautiful display of revisionist history gerrymandering, claim that Spygate itself had no merit, and was simply part of a "Vast anti-Patriot conspiracy".

Where did I not acknowledge that spygate happened? They were caught and punished. But any "sane and logical person" would go back and look at games they played, and how they won. I go back and look at all three Super Bowls that they won, and somehow, despite this "huge" advantage, they managed to blow leads in all three.

As far as the other accusations you throw around, let's see some proof these things happened, other than your "where there's smoke there is fire, who knows how deep this rabbit hole goes" argument.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 02:49 PM
and the Steelers would have likely played the Rams in 2001

That's not exactly the place to start if you want to accuse spygate of affecting the outcome of games. The Patriots had about 150 yards of total offense with Bledsoe subbing for an injured Brady. A punt return for a TD and a blocked FG returned for a TD are what won that game.

Bilicheat didn't have that illegal advantage that he's used to providing his team with

Yeah, that illegal advantage that allowed them to blow a 14 point lead to the Rams, give up an 11 point lead and allow 19 4th quarter points to the Panthers (who had taken steroids before the game), and blow a 24-14 lead to the Eagles.

f not for video tape, the Eagles and Panthers would likely have won each their first SB

I already mentioned the roided up Panthers, but yeah, I can imagine the Eagles winning. I mean, go back to 2003, when the Eagles-Patriots game was a 21 point win....

....A 21 point win for the Patriots that is. So they stole the signals from 2003, and then went out to beat the Eagles by a whopping 3 points a year and a half later.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 02:50 PM
Also, that 2001 AFCCG? It was the first time Belichick had faced the Steelers as head coach of New England. The last time the Patriots even played Pitt was in 1998. Belichick himself I don't think had faced them since 1996. Exactly where is spygate supposed to factor in here?

Indo
10-07-2009, 03:03 PM
I guess I am confused as to why you continue to attempt to win any of us over, or try to refute any of our points, by repeatedly stating that Spygate didn't/doesn't matter.

Take off you Homer glasses for just 2 seconds and answer this one question:

How would you feel about the Giants beating the Cheatriots in the Superbowl (Doh!) if the situation had been reversed---if they had been caught cheating in any way, shape, or form (for example, if there was a question as to whether or not the Giants might have known the defensive call for The Play). Maybe they knew the defensive call. Maybe they didn't. Would you raise an eyebrow? Would you put an asterisk after their win? (Add to this that Der Commisar has buried ALL real evidence so that no one can REALLY know the extent of the cheating. Why did he do that? It seems that transparency in divulging ALL disgressions would be the better judgment. Hence the huge asterisk after the wins. The cheating may have been minor. It may have been very significant. Doesn't matter. It was against the rules.)

Don't be a homer. Answer the question honestly (at least to yourself--but a real man would answer honestly to us as well)

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 03:03 PM
Not a single fact or figure to refute mine, simply regurgitated toeing of "The Patriot Line" and refusing to acknowledge any wrongdoing at all.

As for 2001, that was the first year that Belichick acknowledged taping, and also the first year suspicions were aroused...the previous year Belichick had a very "Previous Belichick Year" (ie Browns-type year)of 5-11. He was 41-55 prior to the first cheating.

Oh, and as for Cassel? He probably is about an above average QB as well. Hard to tell really since the fact that he played in NE makes EVERYTHING about him questionable now.

Indo, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, simply systematically laying out the facts and stats as they are. My eyes, however, are wide open, and I feel sorry for those who aren't quite able to stop squinting theirs shut.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:06 PM
As for 2001, that was the first year that Belichick acknowledged taping, and also the first year suspicions were aroused

Well, how does spygate factor into the 2001 AFCCG? If that was the first year he taped, he would have no prior signals. It was the first time Belichick as head coach of NE faced Pittsburgh.

Plus, as I said, the Patriots won that on two special teams touchdowns. You don't need to signals to return a punt and block a FG.

fansince'76
10-07-2009, 03:06 PM
I guess I am confused as to why you continue to attempt to win any of us over, or try to refute any of our points, by repeatedly stating that Spygate didn't/doesn't matter.

Yep, absolutely no benefit was derived from it. That's why they did it for 7+ seasons. :coffee:

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:12 PM
Well, how does spygate factor into the 2001 AFCCG? If that was the first year he taped, he would have no prior signals. It was the first time Belichick as head coach of NE faced Pittsburgh.

Plus, as I said, the Patriots won that on two special teams touchdowns. You don't need to signals to return a punt and block a FG.

You may not need signals for Special Teams but when you know the calls coming in, it gives you an advantage (at least one good enough to keep the game close so you can kick a game winning field goal in waining seconds). I mean let's face it, it's easy to call a screen play to the 'correct' side of the field when you know the area is going to be open. It's also a lot easier to complete that pass when you know the location of your RB or WR on that play - being able to get rid of the ball prior to the pash rush getting to you.

Your attempt = EPIC FAILURE!

Indo
10-07-2009, 03:15 PM
Not a single fact or figure to refute mine, simply regurgitated toeing of "The Patriot Line" and refusing to acknowledge any wrongdoing at all.

As for 2001, that was the first year that Belichick acknowledged taping, and also the first year suspicions were aroused...the previous year Belichick had a very "Previous Belichick Year" (ie Browns-type year)of 5-11. He was 41-55 prior to the first cheating.

Oh, and as for Cassel? He probably is about an above average QB as well. Hard to tell really since the fact that he played in NE makes EVERYTHING about him questionable now.

Indo, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, simply systematically laying out the facts and stats as they are. My eyes, however, are wide open, and I feel sorry for those who aren't quite able to stop squinting theirs shut.

No need to explain anything to me. Out of curiosity I looked at the NFL site at Marsha's and Cassel's stats and pulled out the calculator---your estimates are very close. Incidentally, looking at Ben's QBR over the same time periods (and throwing out Brady's injury year) gives a rating of 90ish for Ben.

I just don't get why these Pats* fans try to wriggle and squirm their way away from the FACT that they cheated. And Goodell hid/destroyed all of the evidence; and continues to show favoritism and rule changes,etc. to these questionable "Professionals"

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:21 PM
You may not need signals for Special Teams

Good, then we can throw out the 2001 AFCCG as being tainted, since the Patriots had no prior signals and won that game on special teams.

It's also a lot easier to complete that pass when you know the location of your RB or WR on that play - being able to get rid of the ball prior to the pash rush getting to you.

No way! So you're saying the Patriots knew where their own players were going to be as they ran the play?

revefsreleets
10-07-2009, 03:28 PM
Woah! Who said anything about the 2001 AFCCG? I'm not narrowing my argument. Belichick exhibited a pattern of cheating and gaining unfair advantages from 2001-present. I'm sure he's still cheating, just in another fashion. He's simply NOT that great of a coach to amass the record he has any other way.

We cannot throw out ANY single game from 2001 on, as they are ALL, in their entirety, suspect and "under the influence" of Belichick and his "win at ANY cost, rules be damned" coaching style.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:36 PM
We cannot throw out ANY single game from 2001 on, as they are ALL, in their entirety, suspect and "under the influence" of Belichick and his "win at ANY cost, rules be damned" coaching style.

Okay, so I'll ask again. If Belichick started coaching in NE in 2000, and cheating in 2001, and this was his first game against Pittsburgh, what could he have done to affect the outcome of that game? No signals, no stolen playbooks (not that there were any to begin with, but according to you there were) to aid him, and a game where the Patriots scored 14 points off special teams play.

I keep asking because TheWarden said the Steelers would have played the Rams in the Super Bowl that year, had the Patriots not stolen signals. There were no signals to steal. They hadn't played them since Belichick got there!

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:38 PM
No way! So you're saying the Patriots knew where their own players were going to be as they ran the play?

Follow the play. You wait for a defensive signal which calls for weak side blitz (for sake of conversation), you can now call a specific play to the vacated area which leaves open field for the player, thus eliminating any surprise by the defense, and in turn elevating a panty waist QB to some level he truly doesn't belong.

I'd love to see what the metrosexual could do if he actually had to take a hit!

Hammer Of The GODS
10-07-2009, 03:39 PM
Good, then we can throw out the 2001 AFCCG as being tainted, since the Patriots had no prior signals and won that game on special teams.


Now your hanging on this arguement?

As far as I'm concerned the fact that a CHEATER "claims" "2001 was the 1st year I cheated" is tantamount to slick willy claiming "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"!

Man up and OWN IT !

Your team will FOREVER be the CHEATRIOTS and your whole fan base is a joke in the eyes of every other teams fans!


.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:40 PM
As far as I'm concerned the fact that a CHEATER "claims" "2001 was the 1st year I cheated" is tantamount to slick willy claiming "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"!

Now we're getting somewhere. So are you saying Belichick was cheating before 2001?

Hammer Of The GODS
10-07-2009, 03:46 PM
Now we're getting somewhere. So are you saying Belichick was cheating before 2001?

It is naive (like most pats fans) to think that he did not go into that game with some form of cheating to help his team. Thats his MO. Doesn't have to be stolen signals per say. Its his OWN DAMN FAULT that his legacy is tainted.

Indo
10-07-2009, 03:47 PM
Wow

You REALLY need to go into Politics.

And there is NO DOUBT in my mind that you must be in Law School 'cause the doublespeak is heavy.

Pay attention. I'm typing real slow---

What we are saying is that the Patriots* CHEATED. Period. Doesn't matter when. It happened. Even you acknowledge it in your posts. Forget about trying to dissect out the hows or whys (well, we know why); or exactly which plays/outcomes were affected by the cheating. It doesn't matter. The ONLY thing that matters is that it happened. It is not legal. It taints the victories and ALL accomplishments of your alleged star QB.

Quit talking in circles and man-up to that FACT

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:48 PM
Now we're getting somewhere. So are you saying Belichick was cheating before 2001?

Here I'll play devil's advocate. Besides you're getting to be like TIMMAH, here for entertainment purposes only and adding nothing to the site. But I digress, here you go.

I would summize that belicheat was cheating when he was coach in cleveland but he had neither the staph nor an owner that would support such actions. When he got to new england, he found an owner in mrs. kraft that would not only support him but enable him to partake in such scandals. Therefore, when he brought his 'supplies' (read all previously gathered data) from clown town, he was able to put together a nice library to help him start winning. And as he put together more and more videos and cheat sheets he proved advantageous in all aspects of the patriots* game.

There does that make you feel better now?

face it, you support a team of low-life cheaters that lack integrity and honesty, and nothing you say here or in any other logical debate will change that. You, like the kommissioner, like kraft, like belicheat, and like brady, want to sweep it under the rug, but the problem is that those who understand that game won't let it go out like that.

So keep :banging: until you bleed out, because other than the few patriots* fans we have on this site, no one else is going to jump on that wall with you!

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:48 PM
What we are saying is that the Patriots* CHEATED. Period. Doesn't matter when. It happened. Even you acknowledge it in your posts. Forget about trying to dissect out the hows or whys (well, we know why); or exactly which plays/outcomes were affected by the cheating. It doesn't matter. The ONLY thing that matters is that it happened. It is not legal. It taints the victories and ALL accomplishments of your alleged star QB.

Quit talking in circles and man-up to that FACT

Sure, as soon as you can point me to anywhere where the NFL has placed an asterisk or says the Patriots championships are tainted.

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:50 PM
Sure, as soon as you can point me to anywhere where the NFL has placed an asterisk or says the Patriots championships are tainted.

Why the heck would the NFL do that when the commissioner basically showed his support for the activities when he destroyed the tapes before anyone else could view them.

Just like with Barry Bonds who has the homerun record, there's no asterik on his record but the fans know and it won't be allowed to die...because fans demand integrity, especially when they know that something is so wrong.

But yet you still defend the cheating!

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:52 PM
Therefore, when he brought his 'supplies' (read all previously gathered data) from clown town, he was able to put together a nice library to help him start winning. And as he put together more and more videos and cheat sheets he proved advantageous in all aspects of the patriots* game.

Well, his library was taken away after game one in 2007, so the Patriots must have absolutely collapsed, right?

Oh, wait. They're 31-7 since then, and have already beaten the Falcons and Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

Hammer Of The GODS
10-07-2009, 03:54 PM
Sure, as soon as you can point me to anywhere where the NFL has placed an asterisk or says the Patriots championships are tainted.

Wow you are not to bright are ya?

If the NFL did not push it under the rug and pretend it didn't matter it would have put a black eye on a league that has been the poster child of ALL professional leagues.

And MORE important it would have cost the NFL a lot of fans and thier MONEY!

And THAT is what Goodeal is all about............. why else are they pushing for overseas teams!

Gaist
10-07-2009, 03:55 PM
Why the heck would the NFL do that when the commissioner basically showed his support for the activities when he destroyed the tapes before anyone else could view them.

Except I think they did view them. They showed a tape from a Chargers game, where, get this, the camera pans over the cheerleader's butts on the sidelines! I don't know about you, but I feel that if you can get a good idea of what their butts look like, you can easily win games.

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:55 PM
Well, his library was taken away after game one in 2007, so the Patriots must have absolutely collapsed, right?

Oh, wait. They're 31-7 since then, and have already beaten the Falcons and Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

You mean like they did last year? Oh wait, that was without their 'star' QB so there was no preferentail treatment for the backup.

And you mean after they received preferential treatment at the most opportune times of the game?

Your coach is a cheater
Your princess QB is a punk-arse wuss
And the only hope you have of having a successful season is if the commissioner continues to make rules that enable your princess to do whatever it takes to win.

Indo
10-07-2009, 03:56 PM
Sure, as soon as you can point me to anywhere where the NFL has placed an asterisk or says the Patriots championships are tainted.

Oh you poor lost soul.

Do you think that they who buried/destroyed the videos are going to do that? EVER?

Goodell: "OK. We got rid of all of the tapes so that no one can REALLY know the extent of the cheating. Now we'll just go into the NFL records and just erase the years that the Pats won. We'll just have do-overs of those years. Nah, that's too difficult. We could just put an asterisk after all the wins, implying that there was some hanky-panky that occurred. Wait! Marsha sells tickets and generates some serious revenue. Can we let anyone think that his wins are tainted? Of course not. Tell you what...just pretend like it never occurred. In a couple of years it will blow over and no one will remember a thing."

Other people in the room: "Javol!(that's "yes" in German). "Heil Commisar"

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:57 PM
Except I think they did view them. They showed a tape from a Chargers game, where, get this, the camera pans over the cheerleader's butts on the sidelines! I don't know about you, but I feel that if you can get a good idea of what their butts look like, you can easily win games.

Those weren't the originals there einstein! And considering the commissioners first response, there is no evidence supporting that he showed the entire video or didn't have someone edit them. But then again I'm sure with the results it's had for your team, you support the commissioners actions whole heartedly and blindly.

Hammer Of The GODS
10-07-2009, 03:57 PM
I'm done with this guy.


You sir are the probe used in a Colonoscopy !

stlrtruck
10-07-2009, 03:58 PM
I'm done with this guy.


You sir are the probe used in a Colonoscopy !

I beg to differ. He's the entrance.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 04:02 PM
You mean like they did last year?

I wasn't aware that an 11-5 record and missing the playoffs on a tiebreaker was a collapse.

Those weren't the originals there einstein! And considering the commissioners first response, there is no evidence supporting that he showed the entire video or didn't have someone edit them. But then again I'm sure with the results it's had for your team, you support the commissioners actions whole heartedly and blindly.

You're right. The originals had the Dolphins cheerleader's backsides.:chuckle:

Indo
10-07-2009, 04:06 PM
Just:banging: can't:banging: Take it:banging: any:banging: more:banging:

Gaist
10-07-2009, 04:11 PM
The fact that everyone was doing it is why there are no asterisks in regards to spygate.

Indo
10-07-2009, 04:17 PM
The fact that everyone was doing it is why there are no asterisks in regards to spygate.

OK. I'll play a little longer.

Let's do a "right-back-at-ya" that you seem so fond of...


Show us the FACT that everyone else was doing it.

"Since the Patriots were doing it, it must be a fact that everyone else is doing it"

No, sir. Doesn't fly. Sorry.

That's the common Cheatriot fan reply used to consolidate and convince themselves into believing that it was "really no big deal, and didn't affect the outcome of anything. We're awesome and we won. It was Fair and square because everyone must be doing it".

It's pathetic. Like Belicheat.

Preacher
10-07-2009, 04:19 PM
Well, his library was taken away after game one in 2007, so the Patriots must have absolutely collapsed, right?

Oh, wait. They're 31-7 since then, and have already beaten the Falcons and Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

Sigh... Ok. One last time explaining this to people who are too dazed by oxycontin to properly pronounce a "R" sound.

1. Video taping made a mediocre team very good.

2. Very good team wins superbowl because of video taping... no wonder Bilicheck never lost to a team twice in a year.

3. Very good players who want to win go to winners. So the Pats* were able to bring in very good players based on their wins which were based on their cheating.

4. 2007 is only 1 year removed from time of cheating, which means familiarity is still there.

5. Now, they are struggling. They barely win against two teams they should have destroyed. Video taping would have helped.

_______________

I could care less about their records as long as the team that videotaping help build is still together. Until Moss, Welker, Brady, etc. are gone from the team, the team is tainted.

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 04:20 PM
That's not exactly the place to start if you want to accuse spygate of affecting the outcome of games. The Patriots had about 150 yards of total offense with Bledsoe subbing for an injured Brady. A punt return for a TD and a blocked FG returned for a TD are what won that game.

You need to reread what I wrote. I said that it was won on special teams, and we STILL only lost by a TD. What if there was no cheating???

Yeah, that illegal advantage that allowed them to blow a 14 point lead to the Rams, give up an 11 point lead and allow 19 4th quarter points to the Panthers (who had taken steroids before the game), and blow a 24-14 lead to the Eagles.

Pathetic.

But again, the outcome was a 3 points in the closing seconds. Heck, knowing if it's run or pass is enough of an advantage.

I already mentioned the roided up Panthers, but yeah, I can imagine the Eagles winning. I mean, go back to 2003, when the Eagles-Patriots game was a 21 point win....

....A 21 point win for the Patriots that is. So they stole the signals from 2003, and then went out to beat the Eagles by a whopping 3 points a year and a half later.

When did you start watching FB. Be honest.

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 04:23 PM
Also, that 2001 AFCCG? It was the first time Belichick had faced the Steelers as head coach of New England. The last time the Patriots even played Pitt was in 1998. Belichick himself I don't think had faced them since 1996. Exactly where is spygate supposed to factor in here?

The fact that the Steelers player heard Patriots players "calling out thier plays." So if Bilicheat can have someone in the stadium filming while the Patriots are there, isn't it conceivable that he can have one at the Steelers game the couple of games before?

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 04:24 PM
Good, then we can throw out the 2001 AFCCG as being tainted, since the Patriots had no prior signals and won that game on special teams.





Bullshit. Again, who said the team had to play the Patriots prior to the game in question???

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 04:26 PM
Well, his library was taken away after game one in 2007, so the Patriots must have absolutely collapsed, right?

Oh, wait. They're 31-7 since then, and have already beaten the Falcons and Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

So I guess we're back to the ref argument....again.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 04:27 PM
2. Very good team wins superbowl because of video taping... no wonder Bilicheck never lost to a team twice in a year.

Actually, he's lost a couple of times to teams twice in the same year. the 2005 Broncos and 2006 Colts off the top of my head.

3. Very good players who want to win go to winners. So the Pats* were able to bring in very good players based on their wins which were based on their cheating.

Corey Dillon was a malcontent. Randy Moss was considered washed up. Welker, yeah, but who knew he was this good?

5. Now, they are struggling. They barely win against two teams they should have destroyed. Video taping would have helped.

And who were these teams? The Bills, maybe, but the Ravens? They were being called the best team in the league.

Besides, they never beat teams like they did in 2007. Even in 2003 and 2004. They won a lot of close games.

Gaist
10-07-2009, 04:28 PM
The fact that the Steelers player heard Patriots players "calling out thier plays."

Hines Ward said this.....in 2007. About a week after spygate broke. How convenient. it only took him 6 years to bring it up.

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 04:28 PM
Actually, he's lost a couple of times to teams twice in the same year. the 2005 Broncos and 2006 Colts off the top of my head.



Corey Dillon was a malcontent. Randy Moss was considered washed up. Welker, yeah, but who knew he was this good?



And who were these teams? The Bills, maybe, but the Ravens? They were being called the best team in the league.

Besides, they never beat teams like they did in 2007. Even in 2003 and 2004. They won a lot of close games.


Do you actually believe your own bullshit?

Gaist
10-07-2009, 04:31 PM
Do you actually believe your own bullshit?

Yeah. Moss was considered so good, the Patriots had to give up a whopping 4th round pick for him.

MACH1
10-07-2009, 04:52 PM
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w11/bcrab/pats0909copy.jpg

Ravnet
10-07-2009, 05:07 PM
Also, that 2001 AFCCG? It was the first time Belichick had faced the Steelers as head coach of New England. The last time the Patriots even played Pitt was in 1998. Belichick himself I don't think had faced them since 1996. Exactly where is spygate supposed to factor in here?

I'm pretty sure the Ravens were in the 2001 AFCCG :thumbsup:

NJarhead
10-07-2009, 05:39 PM
Yeah. Moss was considered so good, the Patriots had to give up a whopping 4th round pick for him.

Consider the team you got him from smart ass. No on said he was washed up.

Dino 6 Rings
10-08-2009, 04:14 PM
Well, his library was taken away after game one in 2007, so the Patriots must have absolutely collapsed, right?

Oh, wait. They're 31-7 since then, and have already beaten the Falcons and Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

Woah...Hold on Pal...aka the best team in the NFL...Ravens???

You are out of your Effing Mind on that one.

Ravnet
10-08-2009, 04:22 PM
Ravens (aka the best team in the NFL).

So at least we know he is sane. . .

Dino 6 Rings
10-08-2009, 04:25 PM
So at least we know he is sane. . .

Actually I point out that comment as proof he's out of his mind and off his meds.

NJarhead
10-08-2009, 04:45 PM
So at least we know he is sane. . .

Considering he was probably being sarcastic, I agree.

Actually I point out that comment as proof he's out of his mind and off his meds.

Dino, it's okay. I think he was joking. :chuckle:

The Patriot
10-08-2009, 05:19 PM
Wasn't their a huge feud about the refereeing after that Steelers/Ravens game just last year? And now, everything's okay. :sofunny:

NJarhead
10-08-2009, 05:28 PM
Wasn't their a huge feud about the refereeing after that Steelers/Ravens game just last year? And now, everything's okay. :sofunny:

Was there?

I recall them being pissed that Ryan Clark knocked Willis McGahee into next week (much like ...., well you know :chuckle:)

Or do you mean the Santo's TD that wasn't far enough across the line for them?

Meh, OT anyway. Back to the cheaters. Hey, I wonder if we can petition the league and trade Cleveland to the AFC EAST and have the Patriots come to the AFC NORTH. Hmmmmm.

The Patriot
10-08-2009, 06:26 PM
Meh, OT anyway. Back to the cheaters. Hey, I wonder if we can petition the league and trade Cleveland to the AFC EAST and have the Patriots come to the AFC NORTH. Hmmmmm.

You know what's great about playing the Lions? If you lose... :chuckle:

NJarhead
10-08-2009, 06:33 PM
You know what's great about playing the Lions? If you lose... :chuckle:

Funny. I remember when that was true about playing the Patriots. :chuckle:

Gaist
10-08-2009, 08:40 PM
Meh, OT anyway. Back to the cheaters. Hey, I wonder if we can petition the league and trade Cleveland to the AFC EAST and have the Patriots come to the AFC NORTH. Hmmmmm.

Why would you want that? That's like Lakers fans wanting the Celtics in the finals. The Steelers are to the Patriots what the Lakers are to the Celtics.

NJarhead
10-08-2009, 08:46 PM
Why would you want that? That's like Lakers fans wanting the Celtics in the finals. The Steelers are to the Patriots what the Lakers are to the Celtics.

Yea, I don't think it'd be that way....at all. Plus, I'd like to see Brady get the snot knocked out of him at least 4x per year.


I say we let this thread die. That's about enough Patriots AND Ravens on a Steelers forum.