OT- Pats Packers

[upstater]

Yeah no point in continuing this any further, if you think passer rating is a useless stat because running back totals aren't factored into it I don't know what to tell you. I learned a long time ago there is no point arguing with crazy.

Thanks. And I will not argue with fantasy football fanboys.

 

[superjohn]

Thanks. And I will not argue with fantasy football fanboys.

I detest fantasy football and don't play it. You're right though, Christian Ponder should have been considered one of the best QB's in the league when Adrian Peterson was running for over 2,000 yards and all those touchdowns. I'm embarrassed with myself for even responding to your idiot theory.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Man, I hate fantasy football. Just hate it.

A team can have 5000 passing yards, 1500 rushing yards, 35 passing TDs, 25 rushing TDs, and yet the QBR will tell you that the QB of another team with 4500 passing yards, 1200 rushing yards, 40 passing TDs, 7 rushing TDs, same amount of INTs--the second QB had the better year statistically. I'm not even talking about how many of the rushing TDs were run by the QB himself, but the fact that a QB is running for TDs should indeed ALSO be considered when he is rated.

That's a huge flaw right there.

If you want to include a quarterback's rushing statistics then go right ahead, it's only gonna make Rodgers look better.

 

[upstater]

I detest fantasy football and don't play it. You're right though, Christian Ponder should have been considered one of the best QB's in the league when Adrian Peterson was running for over 2,000 yards and all those touchdowns. I'm embarrassed with myself for even responding to your idiot theory.

Christian Ponder threw for 5000 yards that year? You sure about that?

Again, I wrote 5,000 passing + 1,500 rushing.

Are you even aware what the Vikings passed and rushed for that year?

I'll assume NO.

2700 yards passing, 2700 yards rushing. 18 passing TDs, 16 rushing TDs.

 

[upstater]

If you want to include a quarterback's rushing statistics then go right ahead, it's only gonna make Rodgers look better.

Yep. You did it. You somehow came to the conclusion that I the flaw is that a QBs rushing yards aren't in the QB formula.

 

[lavuuk153]

What the hell is going on in this thread??

 

[superjohn]

Christian Ponder threw for 5000 yards that year? You sure about that?

Again, I wrote 5,000 passing + 1,500 rushing.

Are you even aware what the Vikings passed and rushed for that year?

I'll assume NO.

2700 yards passing, 2700 yards rushing. 18 passing TDs, 16 rushing TDs.

Dude, you are out there.

 

[upstater]

Dude, you are out there.

Yeah, I'm out there, with people like Jaworski and Paul Zimmerman and countless other who have said the same thing.

Here's just some boiler plate stuff: "Touchdowns
Much like the out-of-whack weight given to interceptions, passer rating gives touchdowns a bonus equivalent to 80 yards. Remember that all actual yardage gained is accounted for in yards per attempt, so this bonus is "extra" yardage awarded solely for crossing the goal line. This bonus should be equivalent to having the ball at your own 1" line vs. having 7 points and kicking the ball off. According to The Hidden Game of Football, this bonus was equivalent to about 10 yards. Others have more recently calculated the value at around 20 yards. Regardless, an 80 point bonus is way too high."

When you read about the stat, you'll frequently encounter hyperbolic statements like, "Everyone knows QB rating is deeply flawed..."

But the stat fanboys are still impressed.

 

[champs99and04]

@upstater Has anybody here argued that quarterback rating is the perfect stat? I'm not even sure where you're going with this "stat fanboys" stuff.

Everybody can agree that there are several variables beyond the performance of the QB that dictate the outcome of football games. Because of this, there are statistics - like TD to INT ratio, completion %, passer rating, yards per attempt, etc. - that attempt to gauge the totality of the quarterbacks performance. Obviously, since everything that happens on a football field is contingent on quarterback play, none of these numbers are going to be perfect. Total offensive efficiency is usually a pretty good indicator of how good a quarterback is.

In all these areas, Rodgers is right up there with Brady, Manning, etc. Add in rushing touchdowns, which you're for some reason arguing about, and that probably gives Rodgers an edge.

 

[mauconnfan]

Is Rodgers better right now? Sure, but Brady is ancient.

At their respective peaks they're pretty equal in my eyes, with Brady's obsessive competitiveness putting him over the top.

"Obsessive competitiveness"? Have you been watching Rodgers over the years? These guys are similar in almost every aspect. Just because Brady swore last night at the end of the game doesn't make him more competitive that AR, they're both whacked in a good way regarding that!

 

[upstater]

@upstater Has anybody here argued that quarterback rating is the perfect stat? I'm not even sure where you're going with this "stat fanboys" stuff.

Everybody can agree that there are several variables beyond the performance of the QB that dictate the outcome of football games. Because of this, there are statistics - like TD to INT ratio, completion %, passer rating, yards per attempt, etc. - that attempt to gauge the totality of the quarterbacks performance. Obviously, since everything that happens on a football field is contingent on quarterback play, none of these numbers are going to be perfect. Total offensive efficiency is usually a pretty good indicator of how good a quarterback is.

In all these areas, Rodgers is right up there with Brady, Manning, etc. Add in rushing touchdowns, which you're for some reason arguing about, and that probably gives Rodgers an edge.

It's a deeply flawed stat. That's what I'm saying. I'm not looking for perfect stats.

The reason many of us favor scoring TDs and winning so much is that football stats tend to compartmentalize what's actually going on on the field. It's just flawed, that's all.

There are so many crazy stats that totally invert dominant perceptions about football and stats.

For instance, Brady has a better rating than Manning both indoors and outdoors, and yet Brady's overall rating is not near Manning's. When you begin to see startling stats like that, you can't follow these at all.

Again, I don't know how old superjohn is, but statements about a QBs arm require a pretty long look at the league. I mentioned Marino as being a guy that was a better thrower and better passer and quite likely a better QB than Rodgers, but I can't do the comparison statistically for obvious reasons. His comments about Brady's weak arm are just wrong, as is the comment about him being a system QB, as is the comment about short passing (a comment that was true at the start of Brady's career, but not after the first 3 years). That's why I tend to doubt him.

Let me give you an example of the weirdness in QB rating:

QB #1:

Yards thrown: 4830
Passing TDs: 34
Interceptions: 8
Int% per throw: 1.3%
Attempts per game: 40
Completion %: 63
Avg. per pass: 7.6
Yds per game: 302
20 yds +: 57
40 yds +: 8
Rating: 98.7
__________________
QB #2

Yards thrown: 4300
Passing TDs: 39
Interceptions: 8
Int% per throw: 1.4%
Attempts per game: 34
Completion %: 67
Avg. per pass: 7.8
Yds per game: 268
20 yds +: 54
40 yds +: 9
Rating: 108
__________________

When you look at the 2 QBs, #1 had more yards per game, while #2 had a higher completion %. Those were 2 of the differences between the 2 QBs. But the major factor that gave #2 a much higher rating was the 5 more TDs he threw. They are weighed so much higher in the calculation, and the flaw I listed in my previous post explains the weighting for passing TDs in the formula.

So, what gets left out?

This:

QB #1s team:

2100 yards rushing
25 rushing TDs
4 rushing TDs by the QB
34.8 points per game
3rd highest scoring offense in NFL history
____________________

QB #2s team:

1700 yards
9 rushing TDs
2 rushing TDs by the QB
27.1 points per game


When you look at this second set of statistics, I'd say that QB#1 comes out ahead in the statistical comparison. Not because he ran in 4 TDs to the other guy's 2, but because his team scored 25 rushing TDs, which more than offsets the 5 fewer passing TDs he threw.

 

[upstater]

Does anyone here remember Ken O'Brien?

Was he a great QB?

 

[mauconnfan]

Does anyone here remember Ken O'Brien?

Was he a great QB?

Against Miami one game he was! LOL

 

[upstater]

Against Miami one game he was! LOL

Ah, touche.

Old Kenny lead the league in passer rating. He was the Nick Foles of his era.

 

[Matt (Chicago)]

Great in the first half except for giving up a 55 yard td with 20 seconds left in the half. Revis isn't supposed to need help

Aside from that play he shut Nelson down, not to mention the push off by Nelson prior to the catch. Revis isn't supposed to need help? Jordy is one of the best WRs in football, he's gonna make some plays regardless of who is on him. It's clear based on your prior posts that you have some major Patriots hate, but if you're serious with this crap it's also clear that you know absolutely nothing about football.

 

[mauconnfan]

Aside from that play he shut Nelson down, not to mention the push off by Nelson prior to the catch. Revis isn't supposed to need help? Jordy is one of the best WRs in football, he's gonna make some plays regardless of who is on him. It's clear based on your prior posts that you have some major Patriots hate, but if you're serious with this crap it's also clear that you know absolutely nothing about football.

Nelson push off? Wait not coming from a Pats fan - please revisit that before you want that called. Because Gronk won't catch a pass if they call that. He runs right into defenders before making his route, and honestly it should be offensive interference but they never call it on anyone. Edelman did it once yesterday and they called it on the Packer DB - what's he supposed to do instead of putting his hands on him? - take a charge? LOL

Nelson didn't come close to pushing off, that's whining! But Revis was great and is great - not his fault on that one juts a great timed pass and he got zero help thereafter!

 

[jleves]

It's a deeply flawed stat. That's what I'm saying. I'm not looking for perfect stats.

The reason many of us favor scoring TDs and winning so much is that football stats tend to compartmentalize what's actually going on on the field. It's just flawed, that's all.

There are so many crazy stats that totally invert dominant perceptions about football and stats.

For instance, Brady has a better rating than Manning both indoors and outdoors, and yet Brady's overall rating is not near Manning's. When you begin to see startling stats like that, you can't follow these at all.

Again, I don't know how old superjohn is, but statements about a QBs arm require a pretty long look at the league. I mentioned Marino as being a guy that was a better thrower and better passer and quite likely a better QB than Rodgers, but I can't do the comparison statistically for obvious reasons. His comments about Brady's weak arm are just wrong, as is the comment about him being a system QB, as is the comment about short passing (a comment that was true at the start of Brady's career, but not after the first 3 years). That's why I tend to doubt him.

Let me give you an example of the weirdness in QB rating:

QB #1:

Yards thrown: 4830
Passing TDs: 34
Interceptions: 8
Int% per throw: 1.3%
Attempts per game: 40
Completion %: 63
Avg. per pass: 7.6
Yds per game: 302
20 yds +: 57
40 yds +: 8
Rating: 98.7
__________________
QB #2

Yards thrown: 4300
Passing TDs: 39
Interceptions: 8
Int% per throw: 1.4%
Attempts per game: 34
Completion %: 67
Avg. per pass: 7.8
Yds per game: 268
20 yds +: 54
40 yds +: 9
Rating: 108
__________________

When you look at the 2 QBs, #1 had more yards per game, while #2 had a higher completion %. Those were 2 of the differences between the 2 QBs. But the major factor that gave #2 a much higher rating was the 5 more TDs he threw. They are weighed so much higher in the calculation, and the flaw I listed in my previous post explains the weighting for passing TDs in the formula.

So, what gets left out?

This:

QB #1s team:

2100 yards rushing
25 rushing TDs
4 rushing TDs by the QB
34.8 points per game
3rd highest scoring offense in NFL history
____________________

QB #2s team:

1700 yards
9 rushing TDs
2 rushing TDs by the QB
27.1 points per game


When you look at this second set of statistics, I'd say that QB#1 comes out ahead in the statistical comparison. Not because he ran in 4 TDs to the other guy's 2, but because his team scored 25 rushing TDs, which more than offsets the 5 fewer passing TDs he threw.

Not sure at all how you could say that the extra stats you give make QB1 the better quarterback. What this tells me is that QB1 obviously has a better O line and probably better running backs as well. That would make QB2s stats even more impressive.

2nd, it doesn't tell how many games for each QB. Maybe QB2 didn't play in as many games and didn't get the same number of attempts. Hard to tell - would be good to have games played.

Finally it doesn't take into account pace and defense. Maybe QB1's team plays an uptempo offense leading to more possessions per game leading to enhanced total yards and touchdowns. I would be willing to bet team 1 plays at a faster tempo than team 2. Additionally, maybe QB2's defense is bad and doesn't get him the ball back as frequently. I would like to see yards allowed for each team and defensive turnovers created to evaluate the defense and how often each QB is getting the ball back. If you get two more drives per game because you play faster and your defense is better, that's going to seriously inflate the totals.

But the bottom line is QB2 is far more efficient completing a higher %, getting more yards per completion and more touchdowns per attempt while not throwing more interceptions with a worse running game. That's a better QB regardless of rushing touchdowns.

Would you like to tell us who QB1 and QB2 are and what year this refers to?

 

[johnhuskies95]

Not sure at all how you could say that the extra stats you give make QB1 the better quarterback. What this tells me is that QB1 obviously has a better O line and probably better running backs as well. That would make QB2s stats even more impressive.

2nd, it doesn't tell how many games for each QB. Maybe QB2 didn't play in as many games and didn't get the same number of attempts. Hard to tell - would be good to have games played.

Finally it doesn't take into account pace and defense. Maybe QB1's team plays an uptempo offense leading to more possessions per game leading to enhanced total yards and touchdowns. I would be willing to bet team 1 plays at a faster tempo than team 2. Additionally, maybe QB2's defense is bad and doesn't get him the ball back as frequently. I would like to see yards allowed for each team and defensive turnovers created to evaluate the defense and how often each QB is getting the ball back. If you get two more drives per game because you play faster and your defense is better, that's going to seriously inflate the totals.

But the bottom line is QB2 is far more efficient completing a higher %, getting more yards per completion and more touchdowns per attempt while not throwing more interceptions with a worse running game. That's a better QB regardless of rushing touchdowns.

Would you like to tell us who QB1 and QB2 are and what year this refers to?

Almost positive that he's referring to Brady and Rodgers in 2012. Rodgers is QB2. According to Upstater, Rodgers had a worse season because he had the fortune of having James Starks as his running back.

 

[upstater]

Not sure at all how you could say that the extra stats you give make QB1 the better quarterback. What this tells me is that QB1 obviously has a better O line and probably better running backs as well. That would make QB2s stats even more impressive.

2nd, it doesn't tell how many games for each QB. Maybe QB2 didn't play in as many games and didn't get the same number of attempts. Hard to tell - would be good to have games played.

Finally it doesn't take into account pace and defense. Maybe QB1's team plays an uptempo offense leading to more possessions per game leading to enhanced total yards and touchdowns. I would be willing to bet team 1 plays at a faster tempo than team 2. Additionally, maybe QB2's defense is bad and doesn't get him the ball back as frequently. I would like to see yards allowed for each team and defensive turnovers created to evaluate the defense and how often each QB is getting the ball back. If you get two more drives per game because you play faster and your defense is better, that's going to seriously inflate the totals.

But the bottom line is QB2 is far more efficient completing a higher %, getting more yards per completion and more touchdowns per attempt while not throwing more interceptions with a worse running game. That's a better QB regardless of rushing touchdowns.

Would you like to tell us who QB1 and QB2 are and what year this refers to?

#1 QB is Brady. #2 is Rodgers. Both played 16 games. The year is 2012-2013.

Neither has a stellar RB.

Neither had a stellar defense. Both at the bottom third.

If you take the rushing TDs and simply attribute them to the RBs, then yes, I agree with you. Having a potent run game really helps the passing game. But in this case, the extra 400 rushing yards over the year or 25 rush yards a game yielded 16 more touchdowns. In other words, for every 25 yards extra in rushing, you get a TD.

As for completion %s and INTs, they are very close. In fact, Brady had many more attempts and the same INTs, for a slightly better INT rate.

The thing that puts Brady over the top is that he lead the team to the 3rd most points in NFL history, a TD more per game than the Packers. The QB rating, however, was hugely in Rodgers favor. But that's because a TD is weighted very very heavily in that measure.

When you look at the number of TDs scored by the Patriots in terms of passing rushing balance, and then weigh that against the rush/pash yards, you wouldn't think that they ran for that many TDs. They had 2.3x as many passing yards as rushing yards, and that somehow yielded 34 pass/25 rush TDs. That's what I'm looking at right there. The rushing TDs were the result of the passing game much more than they were the result of the running game. You make the same comparisons with the Packers and their passing TDs more closely track their passing yards. The Patriots were different. They simpy ran the ball many times inside the 5 yard line, and of course Brady did his QB sneaks a few times.

 

[upstater]

Almost positive that he's referring to Brady and Rodgers in 2012. Rodgers is QB2. According to Upstater, Rodgers had a worse season because he had the fortune of having James Starks as his running back.

The Patriots haven't had stellar RBs either. Ridley, Woodhead and Bolden carried it that year. A 4th rounder and two undrafted free agents. I don't think either QB benefited from a stellar running game.

And, whatever people say about who had the better year (most say Rodgers), the fact is the two were very very close. Look at the stats. Almost all numbers are similar.

The QB rating though is heavily in Rodgers's favor though because of the weight put on passing TDs.

For me, that's not c0nvincing when you take into account points scored by the offense as a whole.

 

[johnhuskies95]

The Patriots haven't had stellar RBs either. Ridley, Woodhead and Bolden carried it that year. A 4th rounder and two undrafted free agents. I don't think either QB benefited from a stellar running game.

And, whatever people say about who had the better year (most say Rodgers), the fact is the two were very very close. Look at the stats. Almost all numbers are similar.

The QB rating though is heavily in Rodgers's favor though because of the weight put on passing TDs.

For me, that's not c0nvincing when you take into account points scored by the offense as a whole.

According to FO, the Patriots had the third best offensive line that year and the Packers had the 25th best for run blocking.

For pass blocking, the Patriots were 5th best and the Packers were the 2nd worst.

Ridley had the stats of a top 10 back that year. The Packer's best back(Alex Green) isn't even in the top 32.

You're taking a stat that, while flawed, at least attempts to isolate for what the quarterback can control, and implementing something that a lot of times he has nothing to do with. Felix Hernandez is a unanimous top 3 pitcher in baseball, yet the win statistic would tell you that he's not because his team's hitters suck. That's what you're practically trying to do here.

 

[superjohn]

According to FO, the Patriots had the third best offensive line that year and the Packers had the 25th best for run blocking.

For pass blocking, the Patriots were 5th best and the Packers were the 2nd worst.

Ridley had the stats of a top 10 back that year. The Packer's best back(Alex Green) isn't even in the top 32.

You're taking a stat that, while flawed, at least attempts to isolate for what the quarterback can control, and implementing something that a lot of times he has nothing to do with. Felix Hernandez is a unanimous top 3 pitcher in baseball, yet the win statistic would tell you that he's not because his team's hitters suck. That's what you're practically trying to do here.

I've given up, everything you say is clear as day and any neutral observer can see this. My guess is upstater will keep hammering away at his bizarre theory. He wants to disregard passer rating, TD's and every other measurable that says Rodgers is the best. You don't need to look at stats to know that Brady's offensive line has been way better than Rodgers over the years and you don't have to look at numbers to know Rodgers is the best in the league right now. It's really not all that close, Rodgers wins in any statistical category but I prefer the eye test to everything else. Don't normally agree with much the talking heads say but I thought Kornheiser summed it up pretty good when he said Brady and Manning are like Bird and Magic and Rodgers is like Jordan.

 

[upstater]

According to FO, the Patriots had the third best offensive line that year and the Packers had the 25th best for run blocking.

For pass blocking, the Patriots were 5th best and the Packers were the 2nd worst.

Ridley had the stats of a top 10 back that year. The Packer's best back(Alex Green) isn't even in the top 32.

You're taking a stat that, while flawed, at least attempts to isolate for what the quarterback can control, and implementing something that a lot of times he has nothing to do with. Felix Hernandez is a unanimous top 3 pitcher in baseball, yet the win statistic would tell you that he's not because his team's hitters suck. That's what you're practically trying to do here.

Wendell, Connolly, Cannon, are no one's top OL. Like any OL protecting a QB with a lightening fast release, they will look good. The LT that year was a rookie, Solder. Vollmer was injured with a back ailment. Mankins was playing on 2 torn ACLs all year. We see this again and again with the Patriots. People keep touting the offensive lines. And who are the interior lineman? Castoffs, retreads, people who hardly played football before like Stephen Neal. UConn's own Donald Thomas was taken off the dustheap in 2012 and he played a lot. he was completed out of football for more than a year.

Do you really think Ridley is a top back? Bolden? Woodhead? Come on!

 

[johnhuskies95]

Wendell, Connolly, Cannon, are no one's top OL. Like any OL protecting a QB with a lightening fast release, they will look good. The LT that year was a rookie, Solder. Vollmer was injured with a back ailment. Mankins was playing on 2 torn ACLs all year. We see this again and again with the Patriots. People keep touting the offensive lines. And who are the interior lineman? Castoffs, retreads, people who hardly played football before like Stephen Neal. UConn's own Donald Thomas was taken off the dustheap in 2012 and he played a lot. he was completed out of football for more than a year.

Do you really think Ridley is a top back? Bolden? Woodhead? Come on!

The numbers say they were top 5 good. No offense, but I'll go with that. It's the NFL, names mean nothing outside of the skill positions.

 

[upstater]

The numbers say they were top 5 good. No offense, but I'll go with that. It's the NFL, names mean nothing outside of the skill positions.

My whole point here is that numbers mean squat in the NFL, unlike baseball where you have individual matchups. Football is a true team sport.

The number of JAG running backs and offensive lineman that have passed through New England the last 14 years is long. Guys had their moment of glory and then did nothing once they were cut. Undrafteds, guys off the street. Mike Compton, Kenyatta Jones, Donald Thomas, Greg Robinson Randall, Stephen Neal, Grant Jennings, Joe Andruzzi, Ryan Wendell, Dan Connolly, Todd Rucci, JR Redmond, Antowain Smith, Legarette Blount, Jonas Gray, Brandon Bolden, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Laurence Maroney, etc. None of these guys did a single thing for any other team in the NFL. And there were countless more. In 14 years, the Patriots drafted 4 lineman high. Matt Light, Nate Solder, Logan Mankins, and Vollmer. That's it. And it's not like they found real talent off the street. Most of these guys were cut and then didn't play another meaningful down in the NFL.

There's one reason for all of this, and it's Brady's fast release.

 

[johnhuskies95]

My whole point here is that numbers mean squat in the NFL, unlike baseball where you have individual matchups. Football is a true team sport.

The number of JAG running backs and offensive lineman that have passed through New England the last 14 years is long. Guys had their moment of glory and then did nothing once they were cut. Undrafteds, guys off the street. Mike Compton, Kenyatta Jones, Donald Thomas, Greg Robinson Randall, Stephen Neal, Grant Jennings, Joe Andruzzi, Ryan Wendell, Dan Connolly, Todd Rucci, JR Redmond, Antowain Smith, Legarette Blount, Jonas Gray, Brandon Bolden, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Laurence Maroney, etc. None of these guys did a single thing for any other team in the NFL. And there were countless more. In 14 years, the Patriots drafted 4 lineman high. Matt Light, Nate Solder, Logan Mankins, and Vollmer. That's it. And it's not like they found real talent off the street. Most of these guys were cut and then didn't play another meaningful down in the NFL.

There's one reason for all of this, and it's Brady's fast release.

So the Patriots run the ball well because Brady releases the ball quickly. I've now heard it all.

This is heading to the same area where a BY poster claimed that Andre Drummond isn't a good athlete because he doesn't shoot free throws well. I like you as a poster, but I can't do this anymore.

 

[upstater]

So the Patriots run the ball well because Brady releases the ball quickly. I've now heard it all.

This is heading to the same area where a BY poster claimed that Andre Drummond isn't a good athlete because he doesn't shoot free throws well. I like you as a poster, but I can't do this anymore.

You find it surprising that defenses that are on their heels do poorly against the run?

Look at Peyton Manning in Denver. It's the same story. Knowshon Moreno was a bust before he got behind Manning. Then assorted guys named Ronie Hilman, Monte Ball and Anderson are running roughshod over people. You think that's not because of Manning?

It's certainly not the talented RBs and OL in New England. Do you think they're talented?

 

[Matt (Chicago)]

Nelson push off? Wait not coming from a Pats fan - please revisit that before you want that called. Because Gronk won't catch a pass if they call that. He runs right into defenders before making his route, and honestly it should be offensive interference but they never call it on anyone. Edelman did it once yesterday and they called it on the Packer DB - what's he supposed to do instead of putting his hands on him? - take a charge? LOL

Nelson didn't come close to pushing off, that's whining! But Revis was great and is great - not his fault on that one juts a great timed pass and he got zero help thereafter!

Ha... ok, no push off, whatever you say .

Anyways...I never said I thought it should be called.. you assumed that. In fact, I dont think it should have been called. The only reason I even brought it up was as a response to the incredibly moronic comment about Revis "getting punked."

 

[jleves]

You find it surprising that defenses that are on their heels do poorly against the run?

Look at Peyton Manning in Denver. It's the same story. Knowshon Moreno was a bust before he got behind Manning. Then assorted guys named Ronie Hilman, Monte Ball and Anderson are running roughshod over people. You think that's not because of Manning?

It's certainly not the talented RBs and OL in New England. Do you think they're talented?

Holy crap. You've done it! I now think Brady is the better QB. Well done.

 

[mauconnfan]

Ha... ok, no push off, whatever you say .

Anyways...I never said I thought it should be called.. you assumed that. In fact, I dont think it should have been called. The only reason I even brought it up was as a response to the incredibly moronic comment about Revis "getting punked."

I supported Revis on that also as you can see. He was tremendous the whole game besides that and any team would be lucky to have this guy back there.

But don't bring it up if you don't want it called! LOL.......all good but his "push off" wasn't close to what they allow everywhere, not just Gronk. It's something they need to look at in all reality it is such a disadvantage to a player who already is at one.