riseNConquer81

ahhh, i see, you joined our bandwagon yesterday. Ravens are 2-2 against the Pats since 2008. Both wins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=330120017 and http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=300110017) were blowouts. Meanwhile both losses were by a collective 7 points. i dont have to check anything, i actually pay attention to my team...especially while they're winning the super bowl.

lol you're quite the optimist. They dont have to pay any of those people, non disclosure agreement and the threat of near poverty if they open their mouth about anything is more than enough to handle that problem and far more legal than a bribe.

All those teams and people got punished, including (finally), the Patriots. The fallout and backlash from Rice and Peterson got the NFL to pull their head out their rear and re-evaluate the way they handle personal misconduct related to domestic violence...punishments are now stiffer and the process of investigation and punishment is less rewarding. In short: change was implemented. and that's the whole point. You're so focused on money you completely lost sight of the goal. The revenue increasing is only a problem IF nothing is being done about what people are unhappy about. That's not the case. They're listening, and responding. That's the objective. and why are you such a Pats apologist anyway? you're caping harder for New England than their actual fans do...and they're all delusional nutcases, so that's really saying something.

exactly. And they won by how many points again? ah, ok then. and like i said...it wasnt enough to get them the win WITHOUT the 5 yard TD they got on the shady drive. Maybe so...BUT...again...this isnt a game winning drive without the shady one from the 3rd quarter. You can toss out as many pointless arguments as you like, but the one thing you're never going to be able to say is that they couldve won without that drive, or that they finish that drive with out those plays. They cheated our secondary out of the chance to compete on a level playing field because that's the only way they thought they could get past them in time to win the game. no i'm not. That's just the version of things that makes it easier for you to be right. You're still straw manning me. My point, as it always has been, was that the secondary, while obviously not perfect...was ENOUGH. People keep trying to act like the secondary costs us the game and that's not what happened. They made it a little harder than it had to be, but they were getting stops, they were helping...for what they were: they were over achieving. The Pats rushed for 14 yards for the entire game using every man in their back field INCLUDING Brady him damn self. That means their entire attack was aerial, and they were down 14 points...twice...is a testament to what that secondary was pulling off. They were doing it...and Belichick and Brady ripped that imminent accomplishment away from them with that sorry loophole, so now instead of being the rag tag patchwork hero secondary that held its own, now they're the goat of the Ravens playoff exit...and not necessarily because they werent good enough to get it done...but because they were so much better than they were supposed to be, that their opposition had to run a now banned play to get past them. I'm done with people trying to excuse the Patriots' shady play by making our secondary the scapegoat. We rushed for a 136 yards in that game, threw 4 TDs, had their major weapon in Revis looking like a fool the whole game, and converted 3 of 3 Fourth downs by a wide margin each time. The pats were one dimensional and the clock was on our side...minus the New England parlor tricks, we absolutely win that game, and the effort from that underdog secondary is a large part of the reason why.

WHY does someone always have to try it? You have to sustain a drive and get in range to throw that legit TD pass. They used those formations to convert two first downs on a day they were catching 3 and outs every where despite our patchwork secondary. This is basically the "yeah, we definitely cheated but it was a blow out so it doesnt count argument." Which is also dumb. They dont get credit for making a legit play after using the janky loophole to get out of trouble. translation: "yeah you're right and i got nothing here, but I'm not gonna tell you that." *sigh* here you go...i make a point and now you wanna argue vocabulary. You know what i mean...the job was getting done. and i didnt stereotype anything...there's a turning point in every game, and that was it. Now you're just trying to strawman me.

No what im saying is that people arent going to "do something" futile and pointless that punishes the wrong people just for the sake of saying they did something. Because that's dumb. The only way what you're suggesting works is if the Pats fan base grows a conscious and participates...otherwise, all you're really doing is dropping next years salary cap a little bit.

150 yards only gets you one TD according the football rules I'm familiar with. In order to beat a 14 point lead, you need at least two TDs... im not seeing your point. not to mention that looking purely at quantitative data is a flaw ive pointed out MANY times before in similar conversations. Football is a game of situations...it only takes one play to make a ripple. i spoke pretty specifically of the second half...dont see how this is at all relevant.

Why should we boycott the Ravens because we dont like Tom Brady cheating? They only have 8 away games, you really think 8 undersold games out of 256 is gonna make a dent in NFL revenue? They'll still be pulling in tv money btw, and there are plenty fo bandwagon fans all over the country who will tune into watch Brady...

He spoke of the playoffs. Only one of two things happens when we see the Pats in the Playoffs (at least over the last 8 years): We blow them out, or they win by less than 5 points. And in either case, its always personally, Brady's worst day of the season. History shows that.

Ozzie does indeed do a great deal of magical things in managing the team, but this signing isnt really one of them. He's done a lot of things that are far more impressive. A mid level corner lacking versatility got the low ball treatment from his old team and a real contender (who can win without cheating AND give him the chance to beat that old team in the playoffs) approached him with a decent offer after all the big spenders were already gone in the twilight of free agency: that's a very easy decision for everybody involved, no magic needed, thats just supply and demand. beggars cant be choosers: simple as that. Wrong. The secondary was sound in the second half, they just didnt know who to cover because the Patriots were doing shady junk.

WE know Brady's habits, we dont need Kyle Arrington for that. How you think we blow them out so often?

well, youre wrong.

during the whole season. he barely played, thats why they cut him

ew. i know it helps, but i hate the Patriots brand of football, its hard for me to accept a career Patriot on the roster. Especially since they likely BS'd us out of a super bowl appearance a few months ago. Gonna have to do a lot to make me forget it

i know what you're trying to say...and like i said...bad comparison.

the difference being that even if Torrey Smith's performance is lackluster, ti doesnt necessarily have to have a dramatic effect on the game, he can be replaced by one of a stable of wide receivers. If Joe sucks we lose, period. He doesnt get to coast on the efforts of others. bad comparison.

yes. thank you. Its so annoying that the world is so jaded that no can believe there are people who are legitimately just interested in a fair freaking competition.

here's why you're confused: 1) his suspension isnt about the footballs. Once this blew up into a big deal and he didnt cooperate with the investigation to get it wrapped up quickly, it was bigger than that on a couple fronts, especially after Kraft had the nerve to grand stand and demand an apology. He was suspended for conduct detrimental to the integrity of the league. That's for the footballs, the lack of cooperation, the apparent lying on camera, the participation in a line stepping culture, running plays that get banned weeks later...all of it. That leads me to 2) PUBLICLY. He hasnt been PUBLICLY accused of cheating...at least not by anybody in the league. Since all this broke out you can find numerous interviews from various players active retired and otherwise who have low opinions of Brady and the Pats organization, and are un-surprised to hear he had something to do with this. So 3) More importantly than anything...it was to send a message. Brady set himself up to be made into an example, and now he is one. Just like Rice became the example for the new hammer to come on DV violations. You're stuck on precedents. Precedents are irrelevant when you're trying to change a culture...because the idea behind that is to no longer do things the way you were. Basically, there's a first time for everything. lastly, Apples to oranges comparisons. Ngata actually was a legit first time offender, and aside from that one incident, not a single person in the universe has a damn thing negative to say about Ngata. The other thing is that deflated footballs vs PEDs in itself is a dumb comparison. If you do PEDs, it ONLY effects you. The effects of that violation do not exit the sphere of your existence. Flat balls help you out, but also effect the way EVERYONE else who gets the chance to touch that ball plays the game. On that level, its worse than PED use. Its not the same thing.

The Pats WON'T match. They cut him for making only $4M. Unless he REEALLLY wants to be a patriot and doesnt care at all about his paycheck: Boston is the one place he's not going back to.

Pats fans are idiots and I'm glad someone's calling them just that. The level of Stan-ning and caping going on for two ridiculously rich dudes who dont know ANY of those peoples' names is quite ridiculous.

"cut" is slang, and used interchangeably as a synonym for both "waived" and "released". Generally when people are just trying to get the point that the player is no longer with the team across, they say cut. The team or fans of the team getting rid of the player can say cut and not be concerned with which term is actually correct because the result is the same for them either way: the player isnt with them any more. "Waived" and "released" are business terms. When you're waived: your service with your current team is terminated and you must pass through the waiver wire unclaimed before becoming a free agent. This is what happens to every player with less than 4 years of career. Its not a new rule. When you are released: your services with your current team are terminated and you are at that very moment, an unrestricted free agent, free to sign with any team you like. This is the case for every one with a 4+ year old career.

The Pats have Devin McCourty who is a great safety, Pat chung who is eh, and a bunch of guys i cant name becuse they are either terrible or have little to no play time and were the reason that Belichick went out to sign Revis and Browner in the first place.

Winning the AFC East by default and riding the coat tails of two cheaters once the real competition arives in the playoffs is a lot different than lining up and destroying the dudes in front of you. The latter is how we do things, and no Patriot knows much about that at all.

Its May...there are still 90 people on the roster and nobody who gets cut is really "cut" cut. Every team has a few fringe role players on a yo-yo string. If anything happens to the TEs or Pitta doesnt come back, we'll likely see Supernaw again. And Wenning isnt exactly irreplaceable.

fixed. now on to other business. No offense to Wilson, but i dont even know who he is, that doesnt mean anything for our team. I dont see it as a continuance of a curse either. He's a rookie. Rookies have bad mechanics. Bad mechanics lead to broken legs during non contact coverage drills. It happens. This is why we practice.