+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 22 of 22
Thread: In spite of Brady, Pats prevail
-
01-20-2008 06:04 PM #1
In spite of Brady, Pats prevail
It was a good game, and the Pats did what teams of destiny do - they win when they have no business winning. Kevin Faulk is the game MVP in my opinion, what amazing clutch third down catches. San Diego showed a lot of guts, but ultimately you can't settle for field goals against this team. Too bad Rivers didn't see Jackson wide open in the end zone, would have made the game 14-13 at that point.
Good game, hope the next one is that good.Donny Vantage NFL Guru, since 1974
Money won is twice as sweet as money earned
-
01-20-2008 06:36 PM #2
Faulk really did turn some lack-luster Brady passes into 1st downs. It'd be hard to choose between him and Maroney for the MVP of the game. The running game really turned this game in the Pats favour, especially with all the pressure that the Chargers pass rush was bringing.
Let's put a Smile on that Face!
-
01-20-2008 10:27 PM #3
You're right, Brady was not as sharp as he normally is, but that happens. In the end, though, it doesn't matter as long as you win, and they did that. I really don't see them losing to the Giants, of whom one might say that they won despite Manning. I wouldn't say that, though, because throwing the ball in that kind of cold is not easy.
Proud member of the 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ottawa Golf Ryder Cup teams.
-
01-20-2008 10:52 PM #4
Pats favorite by 12½ with O/U of 55....
Hmmmm!!
-
01-20-2008 10:56 PM #5
Personally, I thought Manning played a great game. 260+ yards with no turnovers in that kind of weather is about all you can ask for. Plus the fact that he repeatedly put the team in a position to win.
As for the Patriots, as unimpressive as they were for 3 quarters, to get the ball with the lead with over 9 minutes left and run out the clock is absolutely unbelievable. Probably the most impressive display I've seen in a long time.
-
01-21-2008 08:19 AM #6
Was I the only one surprised that Green Bay just kept throwing the ball in the 4th quarter? I know the running game hadn't been all that effective, but that doesn't mean you should abandon it altogether and just keep giving the Giants the ball in decent field position so that they can keep marching down and kicking field goals on you (or at least attempt them). Run some of the clock off, and hope that Grant can bust a couple to at least soften up the pass-D, so that you don't have the pass rush in your face while your trying to throw into double coverage every time.
While I'm not happy that they prevailed, the Giants deserved to win that game.Let's put a Smile on that Face!
-
01-21-2008 12:23 PM #7
Even if the Pats win the Superbowl it will be a tainted season after they were caught cheating earlier this year. The only ones who will feel different are the die-hard Pats fans, and nothing will change their minds of that.
It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-21-2008 03:41 PM #8
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Barrhaven
- Posts
- 349
Its not tainted at all. From what I understand, they just aren't allowed to film at field level. Signal stealing isnt cheating. They didn't follow the rules on watching the other team sidelines and got punished for it.
If you are playing cards and someone is checking their hand and you can see, should you tell them they are showing their hand or do you take the information being provided to gain every advantage possible.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that "spygate" didn't help them win the other 17 games so far.
For the record, I hate the Pats, and have wished that Brady gets run out of bounds on the sideline, taking out Belichick and himself with not so serious, but bad enough that he can't play injury.
I'd say it will be tainted for all those who hate the Pats, and nothing will change their minds.
-
01-21-2008 04:26 PM #9
I guess San Diego's season is also tainted because Shawne Merriman was suspended 4 games last year for violating the NFL's steroids and related substances policy.
Just enjoy the Pats season and 40 years from now you will tell some kids how good they were and how you watched all of their games and cheered for them...lol.
-
01-21-2008 06:03 PM #10
-
01-21-2008 07:06 PM #11
-
01-21-2008 08:33 PM #12
They were caught and fined. What should have happened is that game should have been lost by default.
And I will never cheer for the Pats, only for the teams playing against them.It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-21-2008 08:52 PM #13
Poor Colby, it must get boring to cheer for losing teams...
Are you going to go 0-19 and cheer (and bet) for the Giants?
You might as well cheer for the Leafs also...lol
-
01-21-2008 09:32 PM #14
Can someone explain exactly what the Pats did with the video camera that was illegal? I know they were caught and fined, but was it because the camera was in a spot where it shouldn't have been, to read signals from the opposition coaches or something? If that's what it is, I'm not really sure what the big deal is ... stealing signs is something that happens all the time in baseball, and it's expected.
But, beyond that, don't the broadcast networks have cameras on everyone, all the time in NFL games? What are they gaining by having handhelds? Close ups of Tom Coughlin's nose falling off in the Lambeau Field cold?www.chapeaunoirgolf.com
-
01-21-2008 10:41 PM #15
New England was caught recording the Jets defensive signals from the sideline.
The NFL says:
"No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches’ booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game.”
The NFL had warned all teams before the season so...
What happened is because the Pats play the Jets twice they could use this infos during the next game. The person videotaping could add comment to go with the signs and they could also hear the QB ... With all this infos they would know during the next game what might be coming. It is not easy there are like 3 guys sending signals in at the same time. On offense, the QB coach also sends play in through the QB's helmet.
Lost of other teams do that but Goodell warn every team not to do it anymore and the Pats didn't listen. He came down hard on them.
Usually a team will ask the home team if they can videotape from the end zone to see plays develop and I guess the home team are allowed to give them the go ahead. I guess at the end of the year when the Jets played the Pats they didn't even dare asking New England for the permission.
I am not an expert on this, so if somebody has more to add or infos to correct please go ahead...
-
01-22-2008 06:57 AM #16
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- XXXXXXXXXXXX
- Posts
- 4,215
-
01-22-2008 09:43 AM #17
-
01-22-2008 10:24 AM #18
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Location
- Forever stuck between single digit and trunk slammer!
- Posts
- 16,809
And you know from that point on they were being watched like a hawk and still managed to win every game. So that tells me the signal stealing wasn't that big of a deal because they were still dominant afterwards. But like someone else stated, is it possible the Pats were the only team to get caught????? I bet that's more the case than the Pats being the only "cheaters" in the NFL. Because where one is doing something there is usually others....."A life lived in fear of the new and the untried is not a life lived to its fullest." M.Pare 10/09/08
-
01-22-2008 11:50 AM #19
I'm not saying that they were the only team to get caught, but they were the ones that did get caught, and that alone should have cost them that game. Did they beat everyone else, absolutely. And now the question is, how much was based on video taping in the past that didn't get caught? It's like golf. If you cheat, I lose all respect for you, it doesn't matter what you do later, it reflects on your personality, and Bilichek has none to start with!
It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-22-2008 03:47 PM #20
Well, we know where you stand and no amount of argument will change your mind. You better get used to disappointment on the weekends, because I don't see the Pats losing too often.
As an aside, let me ask: Do you think it's an accident that when plays are called in from the side, the person speaking always has a clipboard hiding his mouth? What does that say about the willingness of teams to "steal" signals?
Proud member of the 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ottawa Golf Ryder Cup teams.
-
01-22-2008 04:04 PM #21
Frankly it doesn't matter to me if the Pats win or lose, although I prefer if they do lose.
It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-22-2008 05:21 PM #22
I think why they didn't lose the game is because it (videotaping) didn't help them during that game. It was for future reference, it might have helped them during the 2nd match-up this year.
Why don't you think other teams didn't ask for a lost of game. They were probably just happy they didn't get caught. Actually, some teams probably didn't do it this year because they had been warned before the year started. That is where I think the Pats were wrong.
In the past some teams have hired lip readers, phone the other team rooms in the middle of the night, played music during the other team offensive play (Indy), have the opposite dressing room too warm or cold, videotaped other teams from somewhere not allowed, etc.... for me it is all very childish and not really a bid thing.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Tom brady GONE....
By sillywilly in forum SportsReplies: 57Last Post: 09-13-2008, 06:09 PM -
Tom Brady - MVP
By mpare in forum SportsReplies: 17Last Post: 01-06-2008, 02:40 PM -
Pats fav by more than 3 TDS!
By sillywilly in forum SportsReplies: 10Last Post: 11-23-2007, 10:07 AM