If I'm Manning, I retire now.

[Chiefs Pantalones]

I wouldn't wanna play anymore if it's gonna be at a level I'm not accustomed to playing. Much respect though. Great career. But father time is undefeated.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

You really, really don't seem to understand what Spygate was, so let me just clarify a bit.

Fact #1 -- stealing signals of various types has ALWAYS been in the NFL. I'm not saying all teams do it, but lots of teams/coaches do and did. The traditional method, of course, is either keeping an eye on the other guys signals and trying to decipher them, or getting players from the former team (sometimes JUST before you play them) and having them tell you what those signals mean. This is PERFECTLY LEGAL AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN.



Fact #2 -- videotaping by opposing teams under most circumstances has also been perfectly legal for years and years. The tricky part is taping SIGNALS. Ok. That was ALSO widely done, and universally ignored.

How do I know? Because Jimmy Johnson knew all about it. He DID it. He learned about it from who? Marty Schottenheimer's Kansas City Chiefs!






Fact #3 -- The real problem for Belichick and the Patriots wasn't that they filmed signals in 2001, or 2003, or 2004, it's that the NFL came out with a relatively clear (to most people but apparently not Belichick) memo in 2006 which made it clear that videotaping signals was not permitted



And then BB ignored that rule, for reasons that don't make much sense.

But note the timing of it. September, 2006. If the Patriots had stopped then, the NFL would never have cared about any prior taping, by them or any other team that did it.

Note also the absurdity of the rule. It's ok to steal signals in some ways, but not others?

As the New York Times pointed out:




And yeah, I know, tl;dr, but you can rant on and on about cheating and asterisks, but honestly, it's absurd and doesn't phase me a bit. Once you properly understand the "scandal" and put everythign in context, it's pretty damn clear that it's really a big hullaballoo over not much at all.

Or, as Bill Cowher (who the Patriots beat not once but TWICE on the way to Super Bowls):



http://espn.go.com/blog/pittsburgh-s...act-of-spygate

tl;dr

THE EVIDENCE WAS SO DAMNING TO THE NFL GOODELL DESTROYED IT

DESTROYED IT

LEVIED MAXIMUM FINES AND DOCKED THEM A 1ST ROUND PICK

C
H
E
A
T
E
R
S

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

He should. No excuse not to

Love how you set them up for the fall.

I think pats beat the Colts fairly handily, but don't think either GB or NE can beat the Seahawks. The Seahawks are the best team in football and if, as I think the case will be, they keep the lid on both GB and NE (or the Colts, if they beat us and make it to the Big Show), then they should go down as having an all-time great defense, comparable to the Bears of '86, the Big Blue Wrecking Crew and the 2002 Ravens.

And if all of that transpires, it takes nothing away from Rodgers, or Brady, both of whom are more clutch than Manning.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

tl;dr

THE EVIDENCE WAS SO DAMNING TO THE NFL GOODELL DESTROYED IT

DESTROYED IT

LEVIED MAXIMUM FINES AND DOCKED THEM A 1ST ROUND PICK

C
H
E
A
T
E
R
S

Right, facts don't matter to you if they interfere with your spin. Got it.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Love how you set them up for the fall.

I think pats beat the Colts fairly handily, but don't think either GB or NE can beat the Seahawks. The Seahawks are the best team in football and if, as I think the case will be, they keep the lid on both GB and NE (or the Colts, if they beat us and make it to the Big Show), then they should go down as having an all-time great defense, comparable to the Bears of '86, the Big Blue Wrecking Crew and the 2002 Ravens.

And if all of that transpires, it takes nothing away from Rodgers, or Brady, both of whom are more clutch than Manning.

so if the Pats lose to Seattle handily what in the world is the difference with Peyton's 2013 other than Peyton beat Tom in the AFCCG?

[Hootie]

OH'P!

DON'T ANSWER THAT!

I ALREADY KNOW!

Tom didn't have enough weapons.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

OH'P!

DON'T ANSWER THAT!

I ALREADY KNOW!

Tom didn't have enough weapons.

It's an excellent point by you when you point out that Brady doesn't have enough weapons. In fact, one of the many reasons that he's better than Manning is that he wins so many games despite the inferior supporting offensive cast. Manning loses game after game after game, despite having stacked offenses.


Thanks for helping point that out.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

Brady 16
Cassel 11

Peyton 12
Kerry/Curtis 2

still a discrepancy, guy

errr....Colts were 10-6 the year before skippy.

I'm confused why I should care. Maybe the gutless pussy Colts players didn't exert maximum effort without Peyton. Maybe all those excellent players who the Colts surrounded Manning with got old at the same time. Maybe they had alot of other injuries. maybe they intentionally sucked for Luck. Maybe the Colts backup quarterback sucked waaay worse than Cassel (duh, he DID). Maybe their schedule was tougher. Maybe it was a combo of all of the above.

But Luck was 11-5 the year after so as a rookie he was already at least one game better than Peyton, RIGHT?

Yeah, makes no ****ing sense. Just like your argument. It's not Madden. It's not plug and play where all other variables are held steady. JFC.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

It's an excellent point by you when you point out that Brady doesn't have enough weapons. In fact, one of the many reasons that he's better than Manning is that he wins so many games despite the inferior supporting offensive cast. Manning loses game after game after game, despite having stacked offenses.


Thanks for helping point that out.

No prob. If Brady had a team that wasn't just 52 guys off the street he'd probably be on a 500 game winning streak by now.

It's a good thing he takes those awesome pay cuts so that they can keep paying those homeless guys off of the street they surround him with so that he can keep losing playoff games and being able to use the same "not enough weapons" excuse for the last decade plus!

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

errr....Colts were 10-6 the year before skippy.

I'm confused why I should care. Maybe the gutless pussy Colts players didn't exert maximum effort without Peyton. Maybe all those excellent players who the Colts surrounded Manning with got old at the same time. Maybe they had alot of other injuries. maybe they intentionally sucked for Luck. Maybe the Colts backup quarterback sucked waaay worse than Cassel (duh, he DID). Maybe their schedule was tougher. Maybe it was a combo of all of the above.

But Luck was 11-5 the year after so as a rookie he was already at least one game better than Peyton, RIGHT?

Yeah, makes no ****ing sense. Just like your argument. It's not Madden. It's not plug and play where all other variables are held steady. JFC.

It takes a true Patriots fan to try and be able to pretend the Patriots weren't an elite team all the way around THUS allowing a guy like Matt Cassel to win 11 ****ing games as a scrub QB who never even ****ing started at QB in college.

Tom Brady is an excellent QB.

He has benefited SIGNIFICANTLY from the fact he has been on the best organization in football with perhaps the greatest coach of all-time who is ALWAYS ahead of the curve.

But you're right.

Not enough weapons.

I know, I know.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

so if the Pats lose to Seattle handily what in the world is the difference with Peyton's 2013 other than Peyton beat Tom in the AFCCG?

I don't think Peyton losing to the Seahawks means he choked. I think 9 one-and-dones raises that concern. I think multiple pick sixes in Super Bowls raise the issue. I think consistently losing in the playoffs to lesser teams, often at home, raise the issue.

More than twice as many playoff one-and-dones as any other QB in the Super Bowl era. That is...not great.

But honestly, this debate is getting old. You're trying to prove a point, and absolutely NOBODY on this board full of football fans agrees with you. I'm sorry your hero wheezed out of the playoffs so often. I'm sorry he's setting records for playoff futility. But those are the facts.

[Hootie]

I was talking about the Bears having one of the most elite DEF/ST combos in NFL history when Manning beat them for his one Super Bowl and then the Patriots fans came out and talked about how that defense wasn't even nearly as good as the Patriots dynasty defense of 2001-2004.

And then I was like, "oh ... so they won those Super Bowls because they had an all-time great defense?"

And then they were like, "uh ... no. Tom Brady."

It always makes a ton of sense to me that [the corpse of] Drew Bledsoe easily wins the AFC Championship Game @ Pittsburgh and then Tom goes on to win the Super Bowl the next week where the Pats defense held the Rams to a season low in points (years later controversy as to whether or not the Pats taped the Rams walkthrough illegally surfaced) ... throws 1 TD the entire postseason and benefits from a tuck rule no one had ever heard of against the Raiders ...

Yet people won't give Russell Wilson any credit for being a great QB because his defense carries him.

Nevermind Tom road his defense's coattails to 3 Super Bowl's early in his career.

Rules don't apply to Tom Brady.

But, that's because, yep ... you guessed it.

Not enough weapons.

[DaWolf]

Tom Brady any day of the week. Manning has had outstanding WR's with him everywhere he goes, and the team goes out of its way to stack the offense with weapons for him.

Brady, his best WR was Moss for a couple of years. BB goes out of his way to get rid of guys around him and is always balancing the team out. Brady also takes less money than he could to allow for this, and then watches BB get rid of some of his best friends, and still goes out and wins.

Brady has played in 5 Super Bowls, and is a freak catch and a drop away from being 5-0 in those games. And he's a self made 6th round pick, not a heralded No 1 golden boy. Yes, he got lucky he landed in the situation he did, but so did Montana.

Brady has completely overachieved what he was supposed to be, and he's done it in the frigid AFC East, playing outdoors in the elements. Manning has played most of his career in a dome with a division featuring back to back expansion teams that have never done anything in their short history, and stinks it up when the weather gets bad. Brady all day...

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

I don't think Peyton losing to the Seahawks means he choked. I think 9 one-and-dones raises that concern. I think multiple pick sixes in Super Bowls raise the issue. I think consistently losing in the playoffs to lesser teams, often at home, raise the issue.

More than twice as many playoff one-and-dones as any other QB in the Super Bowl era. That is...not great.

But honestly, this debate is getting old. You're trying to prove a point, and absolutely NOBODY on this board full of football fans agrees with you. I'm sorry your hero wheezed out of the playoffs so often. I'm sorry he's setting records for playoff futility. But those are the facts.

No one agrees because this board has hated Peyton Manning for years, and years, and years.

Is that due to how amazing he was in his prime?

Over-exposure on TV commercials?

2004 no punt game?

No clue.

But no one agrees because they have irrational hate towards Peyton Manning. No other reason.

I laid out a thread full of facts surrounding Brady's postseason after Spygate and all anyone did was plug their ears and "la la la la la" rather than actually looking at the facts presented.

But I learned that Tom Brady started out his postseason career 9-0 during the Spygate era and won 3 Super Bowls behind one of the best defenses in recent memory ... and he did all of that by not having any weapons *allegedly*

[Hootie]

yep yep yep

...Brady doesn't have any weapons.

Never heard that one before.

Shit, Brock Ossweiler has every weapon in the world now *allegedly* he should probably win 13 games next year, right?

[In58men]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

yep yep yep

...Brady doesn't have any weapons.

Never heard that one before.

Shit, Brock Ossweiler has every weapon in the world now *allegedly* he should probably win 13 games next year, right?

Never know I haven't seen him throw the rock yet.