[News] Late For Work 5/14: Appreciating Genius Of Ozzie Newsome After Turning Frustration Into Fortune

[rmcjacket23]

Come on Man...  Jacket...  You gonna sit here and tell us that you don't believe that what the Patriots were doing wasn't shady?  They ran that play with the ineligible receivers like 3 times.  Not only that, I still maintain, that if Torrey had fought off that last interception, we'd have won that game....   That was 1st down on that play.  There was plenty left to get the rest of the way down the field.

1. No, they didn't. They ran legal plays. That has been confirmed over and over and over again. That's not a subject for debate or interpretation. The Patriots violated ZERO NFL rules on those plays. Not debatable, not subject to interpretation.

 

2. Shady means nothing to me, because its inherently subjective. Its like accusing somebody of being "unethical"... its meaningless, because two people's subjective opinions about what is "shady" or "unethical" are completely different, and neither is right or wrong, because there is no right or wrong when it comes to those terms.

 

I look at it and say... did they violate any rules with the formations they used? The answer is no, therefore I don't care. Remember... not liking the formation they were using (or in most fans case, simply not understanding it) isn't a requirement in order for the play to be considered "not-shady".

 

This conversation has nothing to do with whether we "could have" won the game, or what Torrey did or didn't do. I never once said that we couldn't have or shouldn't have won that game. I'm simply making sure that people don't think that our defense was outstanding in the second half and that the reason they gave up 21 points was because of allegedly "shady" formations.

 

We gave up large amounts of yardage and mostly got worked over by Brady for a large portion of the second half while he was using standard NFL formations that everybody understands. Whether people want to accept that or not is their problem.

[rmcjacket23]

I'm not counting the "domestic cases".

All of those teams were sanctioned by the NFL...  ALL of them paid fines for their cheating.  Why shouldn't the Patriots?  Those other teams???  Mostly first offenses...  These guys are consistent....  And I haven't heard one person say that he should be banned for life.  That's a little over the top...  I believe that there are folks that believe that he should have gotten more than four games...  but he DOES deserve more than one or two for sure.

1. If you haven't seen people saying that he should be banned for life, then go re-read the comments on many of the articles after the Wells Report came out. Banned for life, SBs revoked, etc. All ideas shared by multiple fans of the Ravens on these very boards.

 

2. Not once have I suggested the Patriots shouldn't be punished for it... I just don't have any idea where people come up with these mostly arbitrary punishments. If people want season bans... what's the basis for that? Is it just because someone wants to be self-righteous and "send a message to the kids", or is it just because someone doesn't like Brady and wants to see him gone?

 

Like it or not, precedence matters. I have zero doubt that the NFL looked at this infraction, compared it to other infractions that they deemed to be "cheating" and issued a punishment in accordance with it. While there's no doubt that there's always a since of being "arbitrary" in any punishment, at least the NFL can in most cases look at something, gauge the temperature in the room, and assess a respectable punishment based on precedence and their interpretation of the facts.

 

I think too many people have decided that punishment is supposed to be devised based on this notion of it being a deterrent to other people. That's a byproduct of a punishment, not the reason why the punishment should be given.

[Postapocalypse Raven]

I could honestly care less about the top 100. The only people that should care are the players themselves and even that is stretching it a little. It's based on fan voting, enough said. The only thing that I care about is how other teams feel when they have to play the Ravens. And that is FEAR! Especially in the playoffs. Go Ravens!

Nope, it's based on player voting.

[riseNConquer81]

All of the statistics I have provided occurred 100% AFTER THE ENTIRE DRIVE where the players used "shady" plays. I know exactly the drive you are talking about, where the TE caught back to back like 20 yard passes down the middle when Vereen was marked as ineligible. Gronk caught a 5 yard TD pass on that drive.

exactly. And they won by how many points again? ah, ok then.

 

 

The 150 yards and two TDs the Ravens gave up that I am referring to occurred AFTER that drive, on completely separate drives, with completely valid and "non-shady" formations where the Ravens knew who was eligible.

 

AFTER the "shady" drive, the Patriots had the ball three more times where they were actually attempting to score. The first one, Brady completed back to back passes for 19 yards, and then Edelman completed the 51 yard TD pass on a HB pass to tie the game (a play in which our secondary looked incredibly foolish). We gave up 3 passes for 70 yards on that drive, resulting in a TD.

and like i said...it wasnt enough to get them the win WITHOUT the 5 yard TD they got on the shady drive.

 

The next drive, the game winning drive, Brady went 8 for 9 for 72 yards, culminating in a 23 yard TD pass, and they never ran a 3rd down play on that entire 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.

 

So, again, you really are just stereotyping an entire half of football based on ONE drive where they used "shady" plays to score a TD. That has zero impact on the fact that in two drives after that drive, the Ravens allowed 11 of 12 balls to be completed, for over 140 yards... all out of completely "non-shady" formations.

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.

Edited May 14, 2015 by riseNConquer81

[Postapocalypse Raven]

Dear God,

 

Please let our secondary stay healthy throughout the remainder of the year, and give Will Hill the will power to just say no.

 

Thank You

[riseNConquer81]

But that's the thing... its not about just one team.

 

We know that the Patriots cheated... twice. We also know the Saints cheated, the Browns cheated, and the Falcons cheated. And those are just the cheaters that we actually know of, completely excludes the one's we think happened.

 

THEN... you throw in the Ray Rice case, Adrian Peterson and others, and the outrage that came from the NFL's perceived incompetence in handling it... AND REVENUE STILL INCREASES.

 

The same people that think Brady should be banned for life are the same people who portray this alleged outrage over most if not all of these incidents, and yet, the maximum response they can come up with is "booing"? Seriously?

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.

Edited May 14, 2015 by riseNConquer81

[The Mom Gene]

1. No, they didn't. They ran legal plays. That has been confirmed over and over and over again. That's not a subject for debate or interpretation. The Patriots violated ZERO NFL rules on those plays. Not debatable, not subject to interpretation.

 

2. Shady means nothing to me, because its inherently subjective. Its like accusing somebody of being "unethical"... its meaningless, because two people's subjective opinions about what is "shady" or "unethical" are completely different, and neither is right or wrong, because there is no right or wrong when it comes to those terms.

 

I look at it and say... did they violate any rules with the formations they used? The answer is no, therefore I don't care. Remember... not liking the formation they were using (or in most fans case, simply not understanding it) isn't a requirement in order for the play to be considered "not-shady".

 

This conversation has nothing to do with whether we "could have" won the game, or what Torrey did or didn't do. I never once said that we couldn't have or shouldn't have won that game. I'm simply making sure that people don't think that our defense was outstanding in the second half and that the reason they gave up 21 points was because of allegedly "shady" formations.

 

We gave up large amounts of yardage and mostly got worked over by Brady for a large portion of the second half while he was using standard NFL formations that everybody understands. Whether people want to accept that or not is their problem.

Yeah, maybe they were not " illegal plays" at the time, but everybody knows that they were so "unethical", that the NFL and 32 owners had to change the rules during the offseason.  Done discussing this with you, as you and I both know there is no changing of some's minds on this issue...  I have my opinion, as do many others... and my not defending the Patriots for their "skirting" the rules for years isn't going to change.

[rmcjacket23]

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.

LOL, but there's a problem... they didn't cheat. Cheating involves a violation of rules, and you already know that the number of rules violated by those plays is precisely zero.

 

You can call it shady if you want to, and like I already explained to others, that's merely a subjective opinion that isn't validated by facts whatsoever. You can call it shady simply because you didn't like it... cool. I care about whether its actual cheating, as in they did something that violates NFL rules. Which again, you and I already know they didn't.

 

It played a major factor in the game... no question about it. What also played a major factor in the game is our inability to defend a HB pass, our inability to even attempt to stop their offense from marching down the field on us on their last possession, and a combination of a probably poorly-timed pass coupled with a lack of aggression by the receiver on that pass... amongst probably dozens of other factors that contributed to the outcome of the game.

 

If you choose to blame our loss on "shady" tactics, go for it. It seems a bit short-sighted in my opinion to blame the totality of a game loss on a small series of events that weren't illegal just to make your argument look valid, but again, that's the subjective nature of this entire concept.

 

I'd put more weight in the general premise of the argument if the Patriots had actually, in fact, cheated. But they didn't.

[rmcjacket23]

Yeah, maybe they were not " illegal plays" at the time, but everybody knows that they were so "unethical", that the NFL and 32 owners had to change the rules during the offseason.  Done discussing this with you, as you and I both know there is no changing of some's minds on this issue...  I have my opinion, as do many others... and my not defending the Patriots for their "skirting" the rules for years isn't going to change.

Not everybody knows they were unethical, because again, ethics are subjective, meaning that by definition, not everybody agrees upon them.

 

I can promise you that precisely ZERO Ravens fans would be accusing their own team of being "unethical" if we did that to somebody else. We'd be praising our coach and team for "being smarter than you", just like the Patriots did.

 

I'll never be the kind of person who blasts other teams for doing perfectly legal things to win a football game, merely to make myself feel better about a loss.

[Shaky End of the Quarter]

First, Tom Brady did not orchestrate two 14-point comebacks in the divisional round of the playoffs. They used a couple sketchy, now ilegal, formations to move the ball 80yds down the field to set up a redzone touchdown. And the other one was a pass by Julian Edelman. If you are supposedly the best qb to ever play the game why did he/they needed to resort to shady formations and having teamates throw the ball downfield against the 26th ranked secondary in the league? Please stop blowing Brady's whistle! He is an incompetent, lying, cheating chump! I only wish he was banned for life. We need real football back. End of rant!

[RavensBaltimore]

No, they didn't. They ran legal plays. That has been confirmed over and over and over again. That's not a subject for debate or interpretation. The Patriots violated ZERO NFL rules on those plays. Not debatable, not subject to interpretation.

Nope. It was already not legal for a player to report in the game as ineligible, stay in the game, and become eligible on the very next play, without taking a TO, and that's exactly what Shane Vareen did on one of those plays. Tony Dungy noticed it and pointed it out. The NFL rule book also states that the defense needs to be given time to make adjustments to offensive substitutions. The interpretation of that rule is subjective, and since the refs put a stop to it after Harbaugh pointed it out to them, it's only logical to assume that they were doing something against the rules. The NFL said the substitutions and formations were legal, which they were, but there were other illegal things going on.

 

So, of the plays that are being referenced, the Patriots actually ran ZERO plays that were legal and not subject to debate or interpretation, and one which was definitely illegal.

[boldtown]

elam is a bust and future indoor league player

[rmcjacket23]

Nope. It was already not legal for a player to report in the game as ineligible, stay in the game, and become eligible on the very next play, without taking a TO, and that's exactly what Shane Vareen did on one of those plays. Tony Dungy noticed it and pointed it out. The NFL rule book also states that the defense needs to be given time to make adjustments to offensive substitutions. The interpretation of that rule is subjective, and since the refs put a stop to it after Harbaugh pointed it out to them, it's only logical to assume that they were doing something against the rules. The NFL said the substitutions and formations were legal, which they were, but there were other illegal things going on.

 

So, of the plays that are being referenced, the Patriots actually ran ZERO plays that were legal and not subject to debate or interpretation, and one which was definitely illegal.

You are confusing two different games.

 

The one you are referencing in regards to Tony Dungy noticing it occurred in the AFC title game against the Colts, when Nate Solder caught a TD pass. Shane Vereen didn't do that against us.

 

The player who did that against the Colts was Cameron Fleming, who reported as eligible and then went to playing ineligible, which is an illegal substitution.

[Fastynart]

Elam comeback? Comeback from what? He has done nothing to come back from. Since being a number one pick, he has played like crap in either safety position. For a guy who the media touted as fast, he can't even cover the tight end. Receivers blew by him like he was standing still. Oh, wait, he was. The Ravens don't admit it, but the fact that they are still signing safeties says volumes about Elam. He out and out stinks.

[rmcjacket23]

Elam comeback? Comeback from what? He has done nothing to come back from. Since being a number one pick, he has played like crap in either safety position. For a guy who the media touted as fast, he can't even cover the tight end. Receivers blew by him like he was standing still. Oh, wait, he was. The Ravens don't admit it, but the fact that they are still signing safeties says volumes about Elam. He out and out stinks.

Or they are signing the safeties for competition, which is precisely what you to do to a player who isn't performing at the level you would like them to be at.

 

Cutting him isn't an option for cap purposes, so the only other alternative would be to sign ZERO safeties and just hand him a job that he didn't earn.

 

Which would you prefer?

 

Under that logic, we signed a QB this offseason to decent backup QB money. Does that mean that we don't have faith in Flacco? Of course not.

[mettro79]

I could have done without the mentioning of those two 14 point leads.

[RavensBaltimore]

You are confusing two different games.

 

The one you are referencing in regards to Tony Dungy noticing it occurred in the AFC title game against the Colts, when Nate Solder caught a TD pass. Shane Vereen didn't do that against us.

 

The player who did that against the Colts was Cameron Fleming, who reported as eligible and then went to playing ineligible, which is an illegal substitution.

You're right about that. I got that mixed up with when Vereen lined up in the slot after being ineligible, which was legal, but everything else I said is true. The fact that the refs put a stop to it once they were aware of it strongly suggests that the Patriots weren't giving the defense time to adjust to their substitutions, which is/was illegal.

[Shaky End of the Quarter]

I agree 100% with RiseNconquer81 comments. And it is beyond me why it is so hard for RMCJacket to understand that sports and the eventual winners of a sporting event is mostly based on momentum. Lets take for instance the 2012 AFC Championship game, when the pats fell behind in the second half (and realised they couldn't run the ball against us) they started airing it out and what happened? Brady got picked off twice. They didn't want the same fate to happen this year so they resorted to "bending the rules" so they could make up for their on field incompetence. Bellichick even said it in the post SB press conference when they asked him if he was scared when the Pats were down by 10 in the SB? His answer was: Not as scared as I was when we fell 14 points behind the Ravens. He knew very well that unless he "bended the rules to the point were it is now considered cheating" they would have never won that game. If they would have gone 3 and out one more time and the Ravens were able to milk that clock running the ball they would have been in a very precarious situation. They never got to this "very precarious" situation because they "bent the rules" to obtain an advantage. And while they did all this they also made their star QB look like a little incompetent beotch that couldn't beat one of the worst and most decimated secondaries in the NFL when they had Julian Edelman throw a 51yd TD pass. But this is beyond the point.

[rmcjacket23]

I agree 100% with RiseNconquer81 comments. And it is beyond me why it is so hard for RMCJacket to understand that sports and the eventual winners of a sporting event is mostly based on momentum. Lets take for instance the 2012 AFC Championship game, when the pats fell behind in the second half (and realised they couldn't run the ball against us) they started airing it out and what happened? Brady got picked off twice. They didn't want the same fate to happen this year so they resorted to "bending the rules" so they could make up for their on field incompetence. Bellichick even said it in the post SB press conference when they asked him if he was scared when the Pats were down by 10 in the SB? His answer was: Not as scared as I was when we fell 14 points behind the Ravens. He knew very well that unless he "bended the rules to the point were it is now considered cheating" they would have never won that game. If they would have gone 3 and out one more time and the Ravens were able to milk that clock running the ball they would have been in a very precarious situation. They never got to this "very precarious" situation because they "bent the rules" to obtain an advantage. And while they did all this they also made their star QB look like a little incompetent beotch that couldn't beat one of the worst and most decimated secondaries in the NFL when they had Julian Edelman throw a 51yd TD pass. But this is beyond the point.

Great teams overcome a lack of momentum. That very same 2012 Baltimore Ravens is a prime example of this. If momentum is something that dictates the outcome of a game, then there's ZERO justification for how we beat the Denver Broncos in the playoffs. They had literally all of the momentum, they had a TD lead, and they were at home. 

 

In fact, you sort of already agreed with this point when you referenced the Patriots, since they came back TWICE against us AND they overcame a pretty large deficit against a great defense in the SB (and imagine this... without deflated footballs or "shady" alignments). Why? Because that's what great teams do.

[TXRavensFan]

You're right about that. I got that mixed up with when Vereen lined up in the slot after being ineligible, which was legal, but everything else I said is true. The fact that the refs put a stop to it once they were aware of it strongly suggests that the Patriots weren't giving the defense time to adjust to their substitutions, which is/was illegal.

 

Exactly. While the formations were not illegal by the letter of the rule, using legal formations in a deceptive manner is against the rules - it's the same reason the Manziel "substitution" play was called back. Unfortunately, the Patriots not only deceived the Ravens, but the refs as well.

[RavensReck27]

I have always thought Ozzie was great, but honestly, what he has done in the past two offseason's has AMAZED ME. Like as of right now, look where we are. We are sitting almost perfect with what we have had to deal with. I seriously think as good as he has been, Ozzie has gotten even better recently. We are officially out of rebuilding mode, and ready to strike. We have a hard schedule, but that just means more exciting games to watch. I can't wait.

[The Mom Gene]

Not the Patriots problem though, and not a violation of the rules. Its not their responsibility to make sure the Ravens line up properly before the snap. That's the refs responsibility. Just because the refs didn't do their responsibility doesn't mean the Patriots are at fault or "cheated", which some people have wrongfully accused them of doing.

 

I don't know why the NFL made the alignment illegal. My assumption is that, like many rules they review every offseason, they looked at the play, determined its largely irrelevant, rarely used, and overall stupid for it to be legal, and thus made it illegal (much like the Tuck Rule was removed years ago).

They made the alignment illegal, because the players are "wearing eligible numbers" on their jerseys.  Which in the case of our game, when it wasn't announced, can actually make it impossible for a defense prepare for the play.  As it did in our case. 

 

NOW BACK ON TOPIC BOYS....... 

[ozrave]

We sign a great and perfectly fitting player, and I read 9 pages of Ravens bickering.

[Jim Giampaoli]

I wonder if Ozzie Newsome ever gave it a thought that once his playing days were over as a tight end for the Cleveland Browns, he would make an even greater presence as a general manger.

[Shaky End of the Quarter]

RMC, I do not understand the comparison of the 2012 playoff game vs the Broncos. The Broncos were ahead almost the entire game but never too far. Even though they had 2 kickoff/punt returns for TD Joe responded to everything the Broncos threw at us. After 1st quarter game was 14-14, 2nd quarter 21-21, 3rd quarter 28-28, fourth quarter 35-35. 1st OT 35-35 and 2nd OT 38-35 Ravens win. I don't see where the Ravens were in a 14-point deficit precarious situation like the Patriots were in against us. And second I never said the Patriots overcame a 14-point deficit twice against a great defense. I said it was one of the worst and most injury decimated secondaries in the league. If Bill Bellichick had to resort to trickery and shady formations to win that game it must have been because he exhausted all other possible avenues. Its that plain and simple. They got scared (as he himself said in the SB press conference) and thought "stretching" the rules of the game was their only option to succeed. And lastly, with all due respect, you should be ashamed of yourself for comparing what Joe, the rest of the offense and the staff whole heartedly and cleanly did to come out of Mile High with the victory. Absolutely shameful. SMH

[January J]

Not everybody knows they were unethical, because again, ethics are subjective, meaning that by definition, not everybody agrees upon them.

I can promise you that precisely ZERO Ravens fans would be accusing their own team of being "unethical" if we did that to somebody else. We'd be praising our coach and team for "being smarter than you", just like the Patriots did.

I'll never be the kind of person who blasts other teams for doing perfectly legal things to win a football game, merely to make myself feel better about a loss.

well obviously enough people thought it was unethical for them to make a change- I think that's all that matters when it comes to that . I agree with you on the fact that they didn't do anything "illegal" .. The way they took advantage of the situation is what other ppl could possibly perceive as shady- bc they noticed the referees were all discombobulated and they capitalized by running a hurry up offense. Can't really blame them. However I can blame the officials- that is who my beef is with. Not only were they not standing over the ball and properly notifying the defense of who was eligible/ ineligible until about 5 seconds before the ball was hiked( which the hand signals are exactly the same- and a change was made before the Super Bowl ) but they couldn't even offer harbaugh an explanation of what was going on without giving him a fifteen yard penalty . Ofcourse harbaugh didn't want to waste a timeout to get a simple explanation ! That timeout could have been crucial in the final minutes if the game. In hindsight you can say he should have called one- but that's hindsight. Also I hear pats fans always coming back with " they clearly announced who was eligible over the loudspeaker at the stadium and they still couldn't figure it out and blazay blah" - you try making out an announcement in the heat of a game with thousands of screaming fans - with a helmet on- while simultaneously trying to get the defensive play , make substitutes , etc. I'm not one of those people who thinks that's the reason we lost- however I don't blame it on the secondary either. Obviously it was a combination of things - a major one being the iffy play call to throw the ball to Torrey on first down with plenty of clock to burn - when we were marching down the feild with momentum. All we had to do was run the ball with Forsett a few times and milk the clock. Even if Torrey caught that ball- Brady had plenty of time left to put a drive together- so all in all it was a poor play call- I can understand it, but wouldnt have done the same. All of that said- it's one thing to be objective and another thing to come off like your not even a ravens fan. And don't act like some of us aren't objective just bc we aren't going with the "against the grain" argument where you do the unexpected and debate the other side. Just bc some of us are doing the "expected" and happen to be defending the ravens doesn't mean we aren't being objective just bc we are fans and we don't agree with you. I know how to play devils advocate- but sometimes you just have to go with what feels right. The patriots have done quite a few things that were unethical- and yes ppl have differing views of what unethical might be- but when the majority feels the same way that pretty much says it all.

[RavensDieHard21]

Secondary is looking rather solid! Our top 3 corners and will hill are cemented in there. But does Elam , brooks, or Lewis get the other spot by mid season?

[purpledown]

Arrington seems like a good lockerroom presence.

[mmcclend]

The most impressive part about what Ozzie has done is that he's working with way less cap than any other gm. We have so much dead money especially from ray rice it's ridiculous. Amazing.

[January J]

Just thought id reiterate this- pats tryed to explain that calling McNally the "deflator " was a reference to his weight - yet they didn't explain these texts : After the Patriots played the Jets on Oct. 17, Brady was furious about the inflation level of the footballs and complained to Jastremski. Jastremski and McNally, who was upset with Brady's criticism, then exchanged the following text messages during the three days after the game:

Jastremski: Can't wait to give you your needle this week.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Moderator 3
Profanity removed