Things I enjoyed seeing...
Grinch
lemons dry he was told the STD test came back positive.
Brady looking like tonight he could do nothing with a supermodel by
cry. "Not tonight dear, I have to just keep weeping".
This wasn't just another loss for them. They really *do* hate the
Jets -- and losing a SB run at home *to the Jets* like this .... after
wasting a 43-pt win against them so pointlessly in the regular
season....
I really enjoy watching the mighty be miserable.
Another of my faults. ;-)
papa.carl44
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:6ve7j61qrs5l4kl7b...@4ax.com...
> The Jets beat 'em 2 of 3 this year... so, who is the better team?
> They have the better QB... after that, I like us.
>
> Enjoy ;)
Tonight...Sanchez was the better QB...and one game at a time is all that
matters.
John Vamp
This I don't understand. Over the course of a full season, they were
the best team in the league. As we all know, in a one-and-done
playoff format, you cannot have a single slip-up. Well, the Pats had
one and are out. That's how it goes. Same thing happens all the time
in the NCAA tournament. Doesn't mean the Pats weren't
"great" (whatever that word means to you). It means they played a
crappy game and were beaten by a really good team that played very
well. That's how "great" teams lose in the playoffs. Happens pretty
regularly, actually.
> The Jets beat 'em 2 of 3 this year... so, who is the better team?
Doesn't matter who was the better team this season. What matters is
who was the better team yesterday...and the Jets sure were that.
> They have the better QB... after that, I like us.
Easy to say after the win. If Brady doesn't throw the pick and if
Crumpler catches the TD, the Pats are up 14-0 and coasting to victory
(most likely). Obviously, the world is full of "ifs" and those "ifs"
didn't happen, but that game had the early makings of a big beatdown
by the Pats....it's crazy to think the talent disparity is huge in
favor of the Jets. The Pats are *very* young with a ton of high draft
picks and tons of cap room. The Jets are a lot older, with fewer
picks, and much less cap space. Needless to say, the Pats aren't
going anywhere. The Jets better capitalize on this window of
opportunity that they have.
> Enjoy ;)
As you should. It was a great win by the Jets. Take the week to
celebrate (you deserve it), but there's still a LOT of work left
before you reach the pinnacle. Road game in Pittsburgh (you won there
earlier this year, but they didn't have Polomalu), and then a likely
SB date (if you get that far) against an outstanding Packer team that
shut you out at your place the last time you guys played them.
Like I said in another post: if you guys run the gauntlet of: at
Indy, at NE, at Pit, and against GB in the SB....well, that's an
incredible run and nobody would be more deserving of being called
champion.
Hammer
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 04:05:38 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 10:50 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:14:53 -0800 (PST), Grinch <oldna...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >Belichick at his presser looking like after he'd sucked a case of
> >> >lemons dry he was told the STD test came back positive.
>
> >> >Brady looking like tonight he could do nothing with a supermodel by
> >> >cry. "Not tonight dear, I have to just keep weeping".
>
> >> >This wasn't just another loss for them. They really *do* hate the
> >> >Jets -- and losing a SB run at home *to the Jets* like this .... after
> >> >wasting a 43-pt win against them so pointlessly in the regular
> >> >season....
>
> >> >I really enjoy watching the mighty be miserable.
>
> >> >Another of my faults. ;-)
>
> >> Thing is, they're only mighty in their minds.
>
> >This I don't understand. Over the course of a full season, they were
> >the best team in the league. As we all know, in a one-and-done
> >playoff format, you cannot have a single slip-up. Well, the Pats had
> >one and are out. That's how it goes. Same thing happens all the time
> >in the NCAA tournament. Doesn't mean the Pats weren't
> >"great" (whatever that word means to you). It means they played a
> >crappy game and were beaten by a really good team that played very
> >well. That's how "great" teams lose in the playoffs. Happens pretty
> >regularly, actually.
>
> I know how things appeared, but the Pats D really wasn't tested most of the season, and
> the Pats O consists of humans. I saw a Myth all season, and many teams responding to that
> Myth. Yesterday, the better team challeged the Myth. To me, the Pats played as good as
> they could yesterday, against the better team... except at QB. Remember how the game
> started... then something changed. The Jets players forced their will on the Pats
> players. It wasn't just the Pats playing bad in a vacuum. You saw what happens to
> players, when their Myth is challenged. Just the fake punt attempt. How often did they
> try stiff like that? The Jets forced the Pats out of their comfort zone, and forced some
> errors, in play & judgment. If anything, I thought you guys were lucky yesterday. There
> were two fumbles, which could have easily gone to the Jets.
> And I'm not a PollyAnna, who just thinks my team is great, etc. I believe the Jets have
> many flaws, but it doesn't mean I don't think they are the better team, than the Pats this
> season, despite the records. And I said the same thing before the game, so I'm not just
> spewing nonsense.
> It's just what I saw.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> The Jets beat 'em 2 of 3 this year... so, who is the better team?
>
> >Doesn't matter who was the better team this season. What matters is
> >who was the better team yesterday...and the Jets sure were that.
>
> >> They have the better QB... after that, I like us.
>
> >Easy to say after the win. If Brady doesn't throw the pick and if
> >Crumpler catches the TD, the Pats are up 14-0 and coasting to victory
> >(most likely). Obviously, the world is full of "ifs" and those "ifs"
> >didn't happen, but that game had the early makings of a big beatdown
> >by the Pats....it's crazy to think the talent disparity is huge in
> >favor of the Jets. The Pats are *very* young with a ton of high draft
> >picks and tons of cap room. The Jets are a lot older, with fewer
> >picks, and much less cap space. Needless to say, the Pats aren't
> >going anywhere. The Jets better capitalize on this window of
> >opportunity that they have.
>
> was open, in the first quarter. If Harris would've scored after the INT. If Folk makes
> that FG.
> I never said there was a huge disparity in talent, only that I think the Jets have the
> better team, this season. You bought into that 45-3 nonsense, as if the Pats were that
> much better. When I saw that game, I knew it was nonsense. To me, the first game was
> more indicative of where the teams were. And that game was very similar to yesterdays...
> the Pats came out strong, then the Jets took over the game.
>
> I'm not so worried about the age of the Jets. The core is young, and in general, players
> wanna play for Rex. So every year, they'll bring in a few good players to fill roles. And
> sign as many of their own key players, they can.
>
>
>
> >> Enjoy ;)
>
> >As you should. It was a great win by the Jets. Take the week to
> >celebrate (you deserve it), but there's still a LOT of work left
> >before you reach the pinnacle. Road game in Pittsburgh (you won there
> >earlier this year, but they didn't have Polomalu), and then a likely
> >SB date (if you get that far) against an outstanding Packer team that
> >shut you out at your place the last time you guys played them.
>
> often seemed to be sleep-walking.
>
>
>
> >Like I said in another post: if you guys run the gauntlet of: at
> >Indy, at NE, at Pit, and against GB in the SB....well, that's an
> >incredible run and nobody would be more deserving of being called
> >champion.
>
> always taught me ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think it's something else - the Jets yesterday wanted it more. The
NFL Network analysts said it when they watched the clip of Braylon
dragging McCourty and Chung into the end zone - he wanted it more than
they did. I believe he said he was thinking of Dennis Byrd at the
time.
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
Braylon dragging the young "stars" of the Pats secondary into the
endzone with him was a thing of beauty. As was Shonn Greene swatting
McCourty away like a mosquito on Greene's TD run in the 4th.
Priceless. I have said it all along throughout the season... the Pats
are pedestrian except for Brady. Neutralize Brady and the Pats are
just another good team. In fact, the Steelers are a better overall
team than the Pats and will be a lot harder.
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
I meant Mayo. The young LB stud (who is a pretty good player).
papa.carl44
"Tutor" <dcat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:14c82c49-e878-45b7...@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
Braylon's run after the catch was AWESOME....I loved it. He is a very
physical WR. And...I think the Steelers will be harder overall.
JetsLife
Blah blah blah. Try and spin things however you like.
The Jets are very young at key positions and the Pats aren't, starting
at the most important position. Your QB ain't gettin any younger and
is almost 10 years older than ours. Welker, Branch and some of your o-
linemen ain't kids either. Your youth is mostly on the defensive side,
and it remains to be seen if that youth is championship caliber. Maybe
Belichick should consider retaining/paying up for his own veteran
defensive talent instead of getting rid of it.
Having a young team and lots of draft picks is way overrated,
especially if that youth turns out to be not good enough. It's about
fielding a SB-caliber team year in year out.
Michael
brady does not bother me so much... it is p. manning that i cant
stand... the pats win was bigger, but i liked it much MUCH better
watching manning eat shit with a wooden spoon. i dont know why some
find brady offensive. he does not seem like a bad guy to me. just a
competitor. to me it seems as if manning the is real lurking
dooshbag.
Rotalius Jephersun
JetsLife <Jets...@aol.com> wrote:
> Having a young team and lots of draft picks is way overrated,
> especially if that youth turns out to be not good enough. It's about
> fielding a SB-caliber team year in year out.
You should know.
John Vamp
Which the Patriots do, thankfully. It remains to be seen if the Jets
will do the same. I suspect they'll be a quality team for the next 5
years or so, but who knows? They have a lot of free agents after this
year, most of whom will likely get a nice raise. The Jets can't pay
them all. Here's the list:
Edwards, Holmes, Stuckey, Mangold, Ellis, Harris, Cromartie, Dyson,
Davis, think there's another one or two. That's a lot of key players
(Edwards, Holmes, Mangold, Ellis, Harris, and Cromartie).
We'll see what happens.....
JetsLife
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 04:05:38 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:14:53 -0800 (PST), Grinch <oldna...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >Belichick at his presser looking like after he'd sucked a case of
> >> >lemons dry he was told the STD test came back positive.
>
> >> >Brady looking like tonight he could do nothing with a supermodel by
> >> >cry. "Not tonight dear, I have to just keep weeping".
>
> >> >This wasn't just another loss for them. They really *do* hate the
> >> >Jets -- and losing a SB run at home *to the Jets* like this .... after
> >> >wasting a 43-pt win against them so pointlessly in the regular
> >> >season....
>
> >> >I really enjoy watching the mighty be miserable.
>
> >> >Another of my faults. ;-)
>
> >> Thing is, they're only mighty in their minds.
>
> >This I don't understand. Over the course of a full season, they were
> >the best team in the league. As we all know, in a one-and-done
> >playoff format, you cannot have a single slip-up. Well, the Pats had
> >one and are out. That's how it goes. Same thing happens all the time
> >in the NCAA tournament. Doesn't mean the Pats weren't
> >"great" (whatever that word means to you). It means they played a
> >crappy game and were beaten by a really good team that played very
> >well. That's how "great" teams lose in the playoffs. Happens pretty
> >regularly, actually.
>
> I know how things appeared, but the Pats D really wasn't tested most of the season, and
> the Pats O consists of humans. I saw a Myth all season, and many teams responding to that
> Myth. Yesterday, the better team challeged the Myth. To me, the Pats played as good as
> they could yesterday, against the better team... except at QB. Remember how the game
> started... then something changed. The Jets players forced their will on the Pats
> players. It wasn't just the Pats playing bad in a vacuum. You saw what happens to
> players, when their Myth is challenged. Just the fake punt attempt. How often did they
> try stiff like that? The Jets forced the Pats out of their comfort zone, and forced some
> errors, in play & judgment. If anything, I thought you guys were lucky yesterday. There
> were two fumbles, which could have easily gone to the Jets.
> And I'm not a PollyAnna, who just thinks my team is great, etc. I believe the Jets have
> many flaws, but it doesn't mean I don't think they are the better team, than the Pats this
> season, despite the records. And I said the same thing before the game, so I'm not just
> spewing nonsense.
> It's just what I saw.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Doesn't matter who was the better team this season. What matters is
> >who was the better team yesterday...and the Jets sure were that.
>
> >> They have the better QB... after that, I like us.
>
> >Easy to say after the win. If Brady doesn't throw the pick and if
> >Crumpler catches the TD, the Pats are up 14-0 and coasting to victory
> >(most likely). Obviously, the world is full of "ifs" and those "ifs"
> >didn't happen, but that game had the early makings of a big beatdown
> >by the Pats....it's crazy to think the talent disparity is huge in
> >favor of the Jets. The Pats are *very* young with a ton of high draft
> >picks and tons of cap room. The Jets are a lot older, with fewer
> >picks, and much less cap space. Needless to say, the Pats aren't
> >going anywhere. The Jets better capitalize on this window of
> >opportunity that they have.
>
> was open, in the first quarter. If Harris would've scored after the INT. If Folk makes
> that FG.
> I never said there was a huge disparity in talent, only that I think the Jets have the
> better team, this season. You bought into that 45-3 nonsense, as if the Pats were that
> much better. When I saw that game, I knew it was nonsense. To me, the first game was
> more indicative of where the teams were. And that game was very similar to yesterdays...
> the Pats came out strong, then the Jets took over the game.
>
> I'm not so worried about the age of the Jets. The core is young, and in general, players
> wanna play for Rex. So every year, they'll bring in a few good players to fill roles. And
> sign as many of their own key players, they can.
>
>
>
>
> >As you should. It was a great win by the Jets. Take the week to
> >celebrate (you deserve it), but there's still a LOT of work left
> >before you reach the pinnacle. Road game in Pittsburgh (you won there
> >earlier this year, but they didn't have Polomalu), and then a likely
> >SB date (if you get that far) against an outstanding Packer team that
> >shut you out at your place the last time you guys played them.
>
> often seemed to be sleep-walking.
>
>
>
> >Indy, at NE, at Pit, and against GB in the SB....well, that's an
> >incredible run and nobody would be more deserving of being called
> >champion.
>
> always taught me ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
All due respect Burf, but you said you could "careless" about the
playoffs after the Chicago debacle. So in some sense you're a bit of a
band-wagoneer since.
Otherwise your analysis sans your anti Schott irrationalism is
probably the best in this group.
Harlan Lachman
<d70bcdae-965c-448a...@g26g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
JetsLife <Jets...@aol.com> wrote:
Life, I will feel better about this analysis after I see who retires
when we win the Lombardi, who we resign from all the FA, and who we get
with our first and third picks. They both need to be starting material.
h
JetsLife
As much as I enjoy it too it's not about lording over them.
That's a great team, a great competitor, and win or lose I honor them.
Seeing them suffer can be fun, but it's transitory. And more than
anything it's about winning a championship. In effect this game means
nothing. Nothing.
John Vamp
> Mangold's already signed.
Didn't know that. Good move keeping Mangold. Dude can play.
> Harris will be signed, as will at least one between Braylon & Holmes, & Brad Smith will be
> signed, he's too much a part of the team. I suspect they'll try to sign Cro also, since
> Wilson has been slow to learn.
> Ellis will be gone, unless he takes the minimum, with the Jets probably throwing in some
> more, for time served.
That would be a big loss. He was a force against the Pats on Sunday.
> Of course, everything depends on a new CBA.
> But, while I have my concerns, Tanny's good with numbers, and I'm sure there'll be some
> players wanting to play here, to take the place of any players we lose.
Well, obviously you're going to field a full roster, so there will be
guys in that replace the guys you're losing. But you most likely will
not have the resources to sign all these guys. You're going to lose
some very good players. Unless other quality players come in and
agree to a low salary (if it was a high salary, you'd be able to keep
your own FAs), you're going to end up replacing these good players
with lesser ones. It's just how it goes.
John Vamp
What "spin"? Did I say anything untrue?
> The Jets are very young at key positions
I looked at their roster this morning, and you're right. Well, at
least they're not "old". The only key guys I see that would be
considered "old" are:
Richardson (39)
Ellis (33)
Taylor (36)
Tomlinson (31 - old for a RB)
Scott at 30 is still young enough for the next couple of years, but
players can decline quick after that. But yeah, you're right -
they're certainly young enough to sustain a high level of play for the
next 5 years or so, I would think.
> and the Pats aren't, starting
> at the most important position. Your QB ain't gettin any younger and
> is almost 10 years older than ours.
QB is really the only spot where age is an issue for the Pats. And
he's only 33. He should be able to maintain a high level for the next
5 years. I'm not remotely worried about that. They have no key
players that would be considered "old", except, maybe Brady (but
again, should be no problem for him as many great QBs play really well
into their late 30's).
> Welker, Branch and some of your o-
> linemen ain't kids either. Your youth is mostly on the defensive side,
> and it remains to be seen if that youth is championship caliber. Maybe
> Belichick should consider retaining/paying up for his own veteran
> defensive talent instead of getting rid of it.
Welker: 29
Branch: 31 - both fine for the jobs they do
Light: 32 - might be time to groom another tackle, but Light is far
from "old"
Koppen: 31 - see Light
None of these four (5, including Brady) are kids, but none are close
to "old" yet.
> Having a young team and lots of draft picks is way overrated,
> especially if that youth turns out to be not good enough. It's about
> fielding a SB-caliber team year in year out.
Again, which the Pats do. It remains to be seen whether the Jets
can. They're off to a very good start in the Rex Ryan era, however,
so the present and the future look bright for gang green.
Harlan Lachman
<527e323f-b52a-43c2...@i17g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
John Vamp <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ellis will be gone, unless he takes the minimum, with the Jets probably
> > throwing in some
> > more, for time served.
>
> That would be a big loss. He was a force against the Pats on Sunday.
John, not only the CBA is an issue. If we win it all, a lot of the older
guys might decide to take all the marbles and go home.
Or the guys who wanted a ring may try to cash in on a big pay day
without any home town discount.
I think with our too few draft picks and final four limitations, we will
be hard pressed to keep up next year.
The only hope is McKnight and Wilson justify their draft status and we
resign all the guys we want.
h
Harlan Lachman
<edc04cbe-59c4-40f3...@z19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
John C TX <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> >
> > > > Ellis will be gone, unless he takes the minimum, with the Jets probably
> > > > throwing in some
> > > > more, for time served.
> >
> > > That would be a big loss. �He was a force against the Pats on Sunday.
> >
> > John, not only the CBA is an issue. If we win it all, a lot of the older
> > guys might decide to take all the marbles and go home.
> >
> > Or the guys who wanted a ring may try to cash in on a big pay day
> > without any home town discount.
> >
> > I think with our too few draft picks and final four limitations, we will
> > be hard pressed to keep up next year.
> >
> > The only hope is McKnight and Wilson justify their draft status and we
> > resign all the guys we want.
> >
> > h
>
> H, I was starting to worry about that as well. The LBers are in their
> prime but on the back end of their prime & we need DL help. This year
> we gave up our 2nd but have a pick in all the other rounds-- we gave
> up our 7th for O'Connell but picked one up for Kerry Rhodes-- so we
> have some picks.
>
> The good news is that more & more players are talking about Ryan.
> Players will almost always go for the money but it is a better
> situation if players want to come here for market & we don't have to
> overpay.
But remember, with the rule of 4 we have to lose a player like Feeley to
get a player like Jason Taylor.
Unless the new CBA does away with this rule, we will be hamstrung in fA.
Trades for players with damaged goods (like Santonio and Cro) and an
first and a third are our main hopes. Remember our 1st is like a 2nd and
our 3rd is like a 4th.
Tanny is going to have to find players under mushrooms as the penalty
for all his success.
h
John Vamp
> In article
> <edc04cbe-59c4-40f3-b069-772e3a54a...@z19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
There's a reason (lots of them, actually) why long-term, sustained
success is extremely difficult in today's NFL.
Beiselbub©
wrote:
>
> Tonight...Sanchez was the better QB...
That's hilarious. The Pats had the ball for ten more minutes, and had
almost twice the number of first downs. Sanchez was told not to do
anything stupid.
Tristan daCunha
pity party!
Wahhhhhh,wahhhhhh, WAHHHHHH!!!!