Deion Branch = putz
Tutor
York Jets. In an interview with KJR Radio in Seattle, Branch, who
accused the Jets of being "classless" in victory, said the Jets
celebrated as if they had won the Super Bowl.
"Sometimes when you are not supposed to be in certain situations, you
act that way and that is how some of those guys are," Branch told the
radio station, according to quotes distributed by
sportsradiointerviews.com. "They aren’t used to being in that
position, and this was their Super Bowl. But it wasn’t our Super Bowl.
This was probably their Super Bowl and that is probably why they were
acting that way."
Jets DT Trevor Pryce started laughing when told of Branch's claim.
"What a funny guy, and you can print that," Pryce said. "He's a funny,
funny guy. If one of my teammates said it, maybe I would (care) ...
but not from Deion Branch. He's the last person I should be thinking
about."
Tutor
a whole lotta talk for 8 yards and get on the bus to go home. Here's
a hint Deion: Beat Revis. Then talk.
Branch would have to fight to become the #3 WR on the Jets. In fact
Cotchery is better than Branch. Certainly was when it counted.
MZ
Brady would rather have Branch to throw to than any of the Jets
receivers. Meh, he's finicky I guess. But I like Cotchery a lot.
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
For some inexplicable reason, Cotch has played most of his best games
as a pro against the Pats. He's really been a "Pats killer" at times
(think of the "Bear Jew" from Inglorious Basterds.) Not bad from a #3
WR in some of these years and a #2 in others:
2006
Home: 6-121-1 TD
Foxboro: 6-70-1 TD
Wildcard playoff in Foxboro: 4-100-1 TD
2007
Home: 6-57-0
Foxboro: 6-53-0
2008
Home: 1-20-0
Foxboro: 5-87-1 TD
2009
Home: 4-87-0
Foxboro: 3-84-1 TD
2010
Home: 4-26-1 TD
Foxboro: 2-9-0
Divisional playoff in Foxboro: 5-96-0
Not a bad body of work.
John Vamp
>
>
>
>
>
> > New England Patriots WR Deion Branch continues to yap about the New
> > York Jets. In an interview with KJR Radio in Seattle, Branch, who
> > accused the Jets of being "classless" in victory, said the Jets
> > celebrated as if they had won the Super Bowl.
>
> > "Sometimes when you are not supposed to be in certain situations, you
> > act that way and that is how some of those guys are," Branch told the
> > radio station, according to quotes distributed by
> > sportsradiointerviews.com. "They aren’t used to being in that
> > position, and this was their Super Bowl. But it wasn’t our Super Bowl.
> > This was probably their Super Bowl and that is probably why they were
> > acting that way."
>
> > Jets DT Trevor Pryce started laughing when told of Branch's claim.
>
> > "What a funny guy, and you can print that," Pryce said. "He's a funny,
> > funny guy. If one of my teammates said it, maybe I would (care) ...
> > but not from Deion Branch. He's the last person I should be thinking
> > about."
>
> a whole lotta talk for 8 yards and get on the bus to go home. Here's
> a hint Deion: Beat Revis. Then talk.
Two things: First of all, Pryce is correct - the only people he
should be thinking about is the Jets and Steelers. Nobody else should
matter. If he spends one ounce of energy thinking about someone on
the Patriots, Ravens, Bills, or Colts, it's an ounce too much.
Second, Deion Branch possesses two Super Bowl rings, a Super Bowl MVP,
and shares a Super Bowl record (11 rec in a SB game). These are
things that a guy like Pryce can only dream of. Branch's resume in
big games is sparkling. Two Super Bowls: 21 receptions, 286 yds, 1
td. Not many players in the history of the Super Bowl have come up
bigger than Deion Branch. In other words, he doesn't need to beat
Revis to talk. He's earned the right to talk as much as he damned
well pleases.
That said, Branch may indeed be a putz and I don't understand why he's
talking about the Jets.
> Branch would have to fight to become the #3 WR on the Jets. In fact
> Cotchery is better than Branch. Certainly was when it counted.
Cotchery is a really good receiver. The Jets have an excellent
receiving corps...I don't think anybody could argue that point.
Beiselbub©
Branch is keeping the focus on this past week's game, and Pryce is
taking the bait Let's hope he keeps it up. He's no putz, he's
telling it like it is. I applaud it. The Jets haven't been there
before, don't know how to behave. I want to see them lose on the big
stage. I'm really hoping they find a way to beat the Steelers.
It's great--send in the clowns.
--
Stay classy, NY.
Michael
at least when the jets get beat they dont bitch about it after the
game... i really like that they dont swing after the bell... branch is
being a knuckle head
i also like that the jets have only good things to say about the
steelers :-) it was the smart play to talk shit at lenght for the
pats and step way off for the steelers. brilliant.
MZ
Yeah, I like Cotch better than Braylon, actually.
But he'd still be #3 on the Pats. Not because he's a bad receiver or
anything like that -- just because Branch is entrenched as Brady's man
date every Sunday. He's a great fit in NE and I hope he finishes his
career there.
Having said that, letting Moss go was probably a mistake. Yes, the
Pats began using more 2 TE sets, and with great success. But when
they were 3rd and long and in the shotgun, which was often the case on
Sunday, I'll take Randy Moss over Brandon Tate any day of the week
thank you very much. Moss + Branch + Welker in the slot would have
been an ideal group for Brady. Unless Moss really was a headcase,
distraction, etc.
John Vamp
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > That said, Branch may indeed be a putz and I don't understand why he's
> > talking about the Jets.
>
> should ignore him. He probably isn't used to losing.
If I was Branch, I wouldn't say what he said. But Tutor is wrong to
suggest that somehow Branch needs to earn a seat at the discussion
table by "beating Revis" or some other nonsense. Dude is a Super Bowl
MVP.
> > > Branch would have to fight to become the #3 WR on the Jets. In fact
> > > Cotchery is better than Branch. Certainly was when it counted.
>
> > Cotchery is a really good receiver. The Jets have an excellent
> > receiving corps...I don't think anybody could argue that point.
>
> I would take Branch all day. Maybe he can do like Jason Taylor &
> finish up with us.
I'm very happy with Branch, as is Brady. Not sure he'd trade Branch
for any of the Jets' WR (even though I think Holmes is better).
Michael
what did branch do for them last week ??? edwards and santonio had a
second year qb throwing to them and they made huge plays. branch
dropped a big pass and had one pulled away by revis...
Tutor
> > talking about the Jets.
>
> should ignore him. He probably isn't used to losing.
>
>
>
> > > Cotchery is better than Branch. Certainly was when it counted.
>
> > Cotchery is a really good receiver. The Jets have an excellent
> > receiving corps...I don't think anybody could argue that point.
>
> finish up with us.
Branch hasn't done shit since his earlier days with Brady. Color me
unimpressed. I think he is vastly over rated.
Tutor
he obviously didn't play against Revis in that SB. And that's ancient
history anyway. What has Branch done since? He was atrocious away
from the Pats. Probably can't and won't have sucess anywhere else.
Yeah... he needs to get more than 8 yards in a playoff game before he
starts opening his mouth. Ex superbowl MVP or not.
Beiselbub©
>
> he obviously didn't play against Revis in that SB.
Please, get off his sack.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i thought i was watching galloway
MZ
As John already explained, he's done more in the playoffs at his
position than most players in the league. He's earned the right to
talk about super bowls. Just as Brady has. How many super bowls did
Brady win while Branch was in Seattle? So would you say the same
about Brady?
Also, even though Revis shut down Branch for most of that game (as he
does to every receiver), dude still had a TD. He wasn't exactly
worthless in this game. You guys can't talk about Revis being the
best CB in the league and then call the guy he covers a bum. Yes,
Revis is going to shut guys down. That's what he does. Doesn't mean
Branch sucks, it means that Revis is quite possibly on his way to
being the best CB to ever play the game.
So, if Branch is so terrible, why did Rex feel that Revis should be on
Branch for just about the whole game?
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
revis was on branch most if the time because branch is their # 1 WR
for lack of a better guy to call a #1 WR. #1 CB on #1 WR. No rocket
science there. What ever Branch was gonna do in football, he's
already done it... He's a retread now.
Tristan daCunha
<Fool ! >
MuahMan
country. They talk like they've actually won something... EVER. The
Jets are a shitstain to the NFL, while the Patriots are the model
franchise. The franchise every single team wants to emulate.
MuahMan
>
> > X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > > That said, Branch may indeed be a putz and I don't understand why he's
> > > talking about the Jets.
>
> > Branch is a great player but he should shut his pie hole & Pryce
> > should ignore him. He probably isn't used to losing.
>
> If I was Branch, I wouldn't say what he said. But Tutor is wrong to
> suggest that somehow Branch needs to earn a seat at the discussion
> table by "beating Revis" or some other nonsense. Dude is a Super Bowl
> MVP.
>
Michael
just what every team wants... a legacy as a cheater
Hammer
It might be true that every franchise wants to emulate the Pats
because all a "franchise" cares about is money.
However, as a fan, I am not envious of the Pats in any way. I just
don't like them, and not because they won Superbowls (by comparison, I
don't particularly dislike the Steelers).
The reasons why I don't like them have nothing to do with Spygate.
They are as follows:
1) The fact that BB resigned as head coach of the Jets after one day
in a very disrespectful manner.
2) The fact that everyone lauds BB as being a coaching genius (which
in some sense he is) and yet Tom Brady would probably be QBing for
another team right now if not for Mo Lewis.
3) The fact that BB and Brady show disrespect in general for the Jets.
4) The fact that Tom Brady acts like an arrogant SOB.
5) Finally, the fact that the Pats' recent successes have attracted
the worst kind of fans - fair weather fans who have probably never
heard of players like Steve Grogan or Tony Eason. Idiotic, obnoxious
fans who think they're special because the team they root for is
successful, even though they probably started rooting for the team
because of the successes. Young arrogant moronic fans.
Hammer
Oh, and I forgot the tuck rule.
John Vamp
uoted text -
>
> revis was on branch most if the time because branch is their # 1 WR
> for lack of a better guy to call a #1 WR. #1 CB on #1 WR. No rocket
> science there. What ever Branch was gonna do in football, he's
> already done it... He's a retread now.
He may be a retread (too strong a word given what he did for the Pats
this year), but he has done more in big games than anyone on the Jets
except for maybe Santonio Holmes, whose incredible Super Bowl-winning
catch puts him in the discussion.
And even on Sunday, while Revis did a great job on him (he does a
great job on *every* WR, even hall-of-fame caliber ones like Reggie
Wayne), he still had 5 rec, 59 yds, and 1 td. He didn't do
*nothing*.
Regardless, he has earned the right to say whatever he wants to
whomever he wants regarding super bowls. The only Jet who can say as
much is Holmes.
John Vamp
Probably true. Doesn't take away from what he's done one little bit.
> Yeah... he needs to get more than 8 yards in a playoff game before he
> starts opening his mouth. Ex superbowl MVP or not.
Total bullcrap. He doesn't need to do *anything* else to have earned
the right to talk about super bowls. There are only 40 players in
league history that have won SB MVP awards, and Branch is one of
them. He's earned every right to say whatever the hell he wants to
say about super bowls, whether you like it or not.
John Vamp
I don't think he's overrated, because I don't think too many people
think Branch is a great receiver. They think he's a good receiver
that plays well with Brady (which is all that matters to Pats fans).
His Super Bowl accomplishments aren't diminished by the fact that he
has great chemistry with Brady on the field.
I think if you lined up the top 20 receivers in the game, Branch
wouldn't be in that line.
John Vamp
> 5) Finally, the fact that the Pats' recent successes have attracted
> the worst kind of fans - fair weather fans who have probably never
> heard of players like Steve Grogan or Tony Eason. Idiotic, obnoxious
> fans who think they're special because the team they root for is
> successful, even though they probably started rooting for the team
> because of the successes. Young arrogant moronic fans.
(1) When the Jets sucked in 1989 and 90, for example, they drew an
average of 53 and 57k in attendance. Last year they drew 77k on
average. Where the heck did those extra 20+ thousand people come
from?
(2) Do you realize that the Pats' current sellout streak began in
1994, a year they started out 3-6, and 7 years before Brady led this
team to a Super Bowl title? Do you realize they still sold out during
the lousy 1995 season (6-10), the two mediocre seasons of 1998 and
1999 (9-7 and 8-8, respectively), and the really bad 2000 season (5-11
with Belichick as HC)? In other words, they sold out every game for
years long before their "recent success", even during seasons when the
team was nothing more than a giant pile of elephant dung.
In other words, you might want to check your facts before you say too
many things that..well...don't look too good.
Hammer
You are providing partial information. Where did you get these facts
from?
John Vamp
The records I got from profootball-reference.com. The Jets'
attendance records I got from http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/nycdata/chapter15_files/sheet019.htm.
The Pats' attendance info I got from their team website here:
http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=mgersexecsbio&bio=547.
I'm not suggesting, btw, that there have not been times when Pats fans
showed up scarcely. In the 3 years prior to Bob Kraft taking over the
team, they were last in attendance (1990-93). I *am* suggesting,
however, that you're wrong that their popularity is due to their
"recent success". They sold out all of 1994, following four seasons
where they were a league-worst 14-50 (.219) over that span. So they
started their incredible sellout streak when they were a horrible
team. It was during the last half of 1994 (after their sellout streak
began) where they experienced some success, winning a bunch of games
in a row to make the playoffs for the first time in years. But people
were coming to the games in droves before they started to win.
And, of course, the sellout streak continued during the down years of
Pete Carroll and Belichick's first season.
JMac
"John Vamp" <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:17450a8a-6fa6-4e0a...@z19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
You're comparing attendance records for one team (Jets) with tickets
sales for another (Pats). The "FACT" is that the Jets have sold out
every single game since they moved to the Meadowlands in 1984 (and
quite a few years before that at Shea). Attendance and ticket sales
are two completely different issues, but don't let that get in the way
of your argument.
JMac
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeah, he does need to shut up. After 8 yards and back on the bus, he
should keep his mouth shut and say "good job" to the team that shut
him down. Branch is an over rated, insignificant player whose claim
to fame is based on Tom Brady. Branch sucked when he left NE and he
sucked last Sunday. He looks like a buffoon flapping his gums in the
aftermath.
Tutor
yeah... put a few more years on McCourty and Braylon wouldn't have
been able to carry him into the endzone.
Tutor
Emulate the Pats? Ahahahahahahahaha! Most despised franchise in the
last decade. Patriots haven't won anything without cheating to get
there. Asterisks suck Brian and the Pats "championships" are
illegitimate. The only thing that can be done to prove otherwise is
for the Pats to do something without cheating. So far.. they can't.
Those asterisks are getting a little heavier for your shoulders every
year the Pats pfail without cheating.
Hammer
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Thanks JMac, that's what I thought too, but I wanted to see whatever
numbers John was quoting to check those facts.
Hammer
>
> The Pats' attendance info I got from their team website here:http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=mgersexecsbio&bio=547.
>
> I'm not suggesting, btw, that there have not been times when Pats fans
> showed up scarcely. In the 3 years prior to Bob Kraft taking over the
> team, they were last in attendance (1990-93). I *am* suggesting,
> however, that you're wrong that their popularity is due to their
> "recent success". They sold out all of 1994, following four seasons
> where they were a league-worst 14-50 (.219) over that span. So they
> started their incredible sellout streak when they were a horrible
> team. It was during the last half of 1994 (after their sellout streak
> began) where they experienced some success, winning a bunch of games
> in a row to make the playoffs for the first time in years. But people
> were coming to the games in droves before they started to win.
>
> And, of course, the sellout streak continued during the down years of
>
> - Show quoted text -
First of all, as JMac points out, you are comparing sales to
attendance.
Aside from that, I think the correlation between either sales or
attendance and the number of fans is very low. Sales will change over
time based on economic factors and growing demand over time. Thus the
Patriots sales figures naturally went up over time. Attendance will
always dip when a team sucks - even if the fans are major fans, they
don't necessarily want to see their team get blown out.
More importantly, the number of fans will always be far larger than
the number of seats available in the stadium. So I could make up some
numbers as follows:
# of seats sold at Gilette Stadium in 1984 - 30,000
Number of fans - 45,000
# of seats sold in 1995 - 40,000
Number of fans - 60,000
# of seats sold in 2000 - 60,000
Number of fans - 90,000
# of seats sold in 2005 - 60,000
Number of fans - 250,000
# of seats sold in 2010 - 60,000
Number of fans - 500,000
Number of real fans - 100,000
John Vamp
He might not only look like a buffoon, he might actually *be* a
buffoon. But he had 5 rec, 59 yds, and a TD - he did not just have "8
yards and back on the bus".
And no, he doesn't need to shut up, not at all. He's said far less
than many Jets players who have accomplished, essentially, nothing yet
in this league.
That said, I personally don't like him talking like he has....but
that's my preference. You may not like it, but he most certainly
doesn't owe anybody - least of all you - silence. If the Jets who
have accomplished zip can flap their gums all they like, then a two-
time Lombardi winner who owns a SB record and a SB MVP, can certainly
flap his, Jets fans' dislike be damned.
John Vamp
The two links I posted both list "attendance". I've never ever seen
any information that shows that the Jets have had a consecutive
sellout streak as far back as you say. Can you provide a link with
that information?
John Vamp
You guys need to cite a credible source for the Jets supposed sellout
streak. But either way, the Pats' sellout streak began when they
sucked...the fan base around here rose up long before their "recent
success" as you claimed. There's no arguing that point.
John Vamp
So you're making up stuff. Ok. Not very helpful, but ok.
Hammer
>
> - Show quoted text -
From anecdotal evidence, I believe there are a large number of
recently minted Pats fans.
MZ
And, Branch isn't the "#1" receiver on the Pats. Welker is one of the
best receivers in football, which kinda puts him in that category. I
agree with Rex's decision to single Revis on Branch and deal with
Welker a different way -- which obviously worked pretty well. But if
Branch is as insignificant as everyone says then I'd have put Revis on
Welker. Rex wouldn't have assigned Revis to Branch if he was
insignificant. Not while Welker was on the field.
Branch is a good receiver. Maybe it's all Brady? Who knows? Who
cares? What's important here is that Branch *on the Patriots*
produces, and there's a history of him producing in big games. He was
also probably the most effective offensive player on Sunday too,
except maybe for Gronk who had a pretty good game. The fact that
Branch had only marginal statistics but was still one of the most
effective players on the team is a testament to how well the Jets
defense played.
One more thing.. For such a terrible receiver, Branch with the Pats
put up comparable numbers to Santonio Holmes this year. Actually,
probably a little better.
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why are you even borthering defending Branch? He's a moron who has
accomplished next to nothing since he left NE. Even upon his return
to NE. His flapping his gums after doing nothing in the game (until
the garbage time) is just pathetic. Your comparison to the Jets is
irrelevant. I'm talking about Branch. Who is mouthing off after a
humilating loss. Frankly, I didn't hear any Jets flapping their gums
about "the other team" after the Pats beat 'em 45-3. Only Rex who
said he couldn't wait to get another shot at them. Branch is just
being a tool. He is an ass.
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
IN 12 games with NE, Branch was 706 w/5 TDs. His average stats are
much worse if youfactor in the first 4 games with Seattle (112 yds 1
TD). He accomplished those stats in a Brady offense almost entirely
based on the passing game. In his 12 games, Holmes was 746 with 6
TDs. And, IIRC, he was pulled after the 1st couple of series in week
17. All this in a Mark Sanchez pass anemic offense. And those 6 TDs
were a bit on the clutch side. I'll take this Superbowl MVP, who has
shown he can play well with different QBs over your Superbowl MVP
whose game is entirely Brady-dependent.
Really... this argument is pointless. I believe Branch is an
overrated putz who is guilty of exactly what he is accusing the Jets
of being. Classless.
If you Pats homers feel otherwise, that's fine. I don't care. Enjoy
him while you have him. He's still a POS in my view.
John Vamp
> Why are you even borthering defending Branch? He's a moron who has
> accomplished next to nothing since he left NE. Even upon his return
> to NE. His flapping his gums after doing nothing in the game (until
> the garbage time) is just pathetic. Your comparison to the Jets is
> irrelevant. I'm talking about Branch. Who is mouthing off after a
> humilating loss. Frankly, I didn't hear any Jets flapping their gums
> about "the other team" after the Pats beat 'em 45-3. Only Rex who
> said he couldn't wait to get another shot at them. Branch is just
> being a tool. He is an ass.
I am not saying he's not a tool. He might be. I'm just saying that
your statement that he needs to accomplish something (like beat Revis)
before he has the right to talk about the Super Bowl. That's
laughable. He's accomplished more than anyone on the Jets ever has.
Doesn't mean that Branch *should* be flapping his gums; I think it's
bad form for him to. But that's just my opinion. (and yours too,
apparently)
John Vamp
Oh ok. There probably are. That's what happens when teams win....the
fan base tends to grow. Pretty common stuff, even for the team(s) you
root for. But if you're suggesting that all these Patriots fans are
bandwagoners, that just joined up recently, you're mistaken. The fan
base grew and was very strong even when the Pats sucked. It's simply
a fact that outweighs your anecdotes.
EZ
>You guys need to cite a credible source for the Jets supposed sellout
>streak. But either way, the Pats' sellout streak began when they
>sucked...the fan base around here rose up long before their "recent
>success" as you claimed. There's no arguing that point.
We got our season tickets in '91 after sitting on the wait list for five
years.
- Ed -
John Vamp
> "John Vamp" <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Ok.
Tutor
I never said he shouldn't say anything about the "Super Bowl". I said
he shouldn't be popping off about the jets after the big win. What
he shouldn't be saying after the Jets beat his arrogant little ass was
this (from my original post) ""They aren’t used to being in that
position, and this was their Super Bowl. But it wasn’t our Super
Bowl.
This was probably their Super Bowl and that is probably why they were
acting that way."
That's not a comment about the "super bowl". Its a slap at the Jets.
And he has accomplished absolutely nothing without Brady. He needs to
STFU. Before commenting on the Jets, first do something meaningful
against them next time. Really, he is just reperesentative of the
limitless arrogance on the Patriots. even in defeat, the Pats exude
obnoxious arrogance. Never willing to give credit where it is due. I
find the Pats reprehensible in so many ways. Pretending to be classy
when they are not. What a fucking charade. Phony facade and all.
John Vamp
Feel better now?
Tutor
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeah. thanks. :)
John Vamp
Heh. You bet. That'll be $300 please. Check in at the desk to
schedule your next appointment.
JMac
John,
I can't say for sure how accurate this info is, but I can't remember
the last time a home game was blacked out for either NY football team
(though I don't think a 100% sellout is required to avoid a blackout).
According to this source, as of 2008, the Jets had sold out 257
consecutive games to the Pats' 159. In any event, it's pretty clear
that Jets' fans are as loyal as any; perhaps more than most, given the
team's history.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_NFL_team_has_the_longest_sell_out_streak
JMac
JMac
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:mglkj61ne660q4psb...@4ax.com...
| Been a while, how things been?
It has been a while, burf. I've had a tough couple of years
personally, but I do lurk from time to time. I guess this year's
success has inspired me to share some of my *cough* insight. I'm
thinking we need to consider a newsgroup Bowl party if we make it
through the weekend. Whaddya think?
JMac
Tutor
The doctor is in.
Harlan Lachman
"JMac" <a...@b.com> wrote:
Hi JMac,
FWIW, I think sell outs have more to do with the size and wealth of the
target market rather than loyalty.
Loyalty is reflected in showing up at games, traveling to away games,
and being silly enough to wear gear wherever one is. To me the epitome
of loyalty are Steeler fans.
The Jets (and Jints) have a long waiting list because 20 million people
live nearby for only 82,500 tickets. Even if the eligible market (men
between the ages of 15 - 60 with money) is a tenth of that, that is a
lot of people competing for a limited number of tickets.
Harlan
Harlan Lachman
"JMac" <a...@b.com> wrote:
John,
I think the Party should be post SB and hoisting the Lombardi.
Celebrating going to the Dance is not the same as being able to
celebrate and tell tall tales of scoring after it.
harlan
John Vamp
> In article <Btu_o.138557$Ud7.34...@en-nntp-16.dc1.easynews.com>,
I think it's difficult to measure fan loyalty. I'm a very loyal
Pats' fan, but I've never been to a game live. Why? Lots of
factors. But it doesn't make me less of a fan.
In any event, I just wanted to dispute the point that the Pats' fan
base is made up largely of band wagon fans. It's just not true.
John Vamp
Says Lucy. Though she only charged a nickel. Hmmm....
Tristan daCunha
MZ
> IN 12 games with NE, Branch was 706 w/5 TDs. His average stats are
> much worse if youfactor in the first 4 games with Seattle (112 yds 1
> TD).
Why would I factor in the first 4 games with Seattle? The point I
made was that Branch ****ON THE PATRIOTS**** produces. I really don't
care what Branch did or didn't do in Seattle, and I don't think it's
relevant either. [BTW, I think Branch played 11 regular season games
with the Pats, not 12]
> He accomplished those stats in a Brady offense almost entirely
> based on the passing game.
What is a "Brady offense", and why didn't guys like Holt, Tate, and
Edelman produce in it?
If you're saying Branch is a "system WR", then I don't disagree. The
guy may completely suck on all 31 other teams. But that's not really
relevant. And it's not like receivers come to NE and suddenly become
world beaters. That certainly wasn't the case in '06, when the
starters were Caldwell and Gaffney (who, by the way, went to Denver
and became just as productive, if not more).
Honestly, I don't even care about the statistics. I was just offering
them up because I figured you might put more stock in them than in my
subjective opinion about Branch.
In his 12 games, Holmes was 746 with 6
> TDs. And, IIRC, he was pulled after the 1st couple of series in week
> 17. All this in a Mark Sanchez pass anemic offense. And those 6 TDs
> were a bit on the clutch side. I'll take this Superbowl MVP, who has
> shown he can play well with different QBs over your Superbowl MVP
> whose game is entirely Brady-dependent.
>
> Really... this argument is pointless. I believe Branch is an
> overrated putz who is guilty of exactly what he is accusing the Jets
> of being. Classless.
>
> If you Pats homers feel otherwise, that's fine. I don't care. Enjoy
> him while you have him. He's still a POS in my view.
Maybe. But he's far less "classless" than Bart Scott, Tomlinson, and
Cromartie. You know what they say about glass houses...
Harlan Lachman
<9f456284-611c-4148...@i32g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
John Vamp <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote:
John, this may be the only time I pull a, "this is a Jets NG" who gives
a flying F about whether Pat fans are loyal or not?
Frankly, the size of this NG and even the JetsBlog.com's posters tells
me that the zealots are relatively few in number for our team.
It is just that to still be a Jet fan has required so much more
commitment than fans of a credible franchise, that I think we are blind
to the band wagon jumpers (especially those with money) who show up in
good times. Especially those of us who went to games in the 60s -- an
effing half century ago.
Most commentators are still writing the Jets off in the short (this
Championship game has most folks picking Steelers at the home of the
terrible towel) and long (we have already been to two Championship games
in a row so if not now, never) term.
If Rex and Tanny are geniuses and get lucky and this gets to be
commonplace for the next decade, I imagine there will be more interest
in all things Jets.
harlan
Harlan Lachman
buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> I think this offseason, CBA notwithstanding, with many key FAs, it should be
> a great
> barometer of how well management can keep the team stocked with talent.
> How well the draft is... who they can re-sign... what FAs they can lure to
> Jetsland... and
> what players they're willing to let walk.
And, if the owners lock out and force a CBA that is onerous down the
players throats (my expectation), the CBA may force stupidity and poor
choices. Lower the cap down for where it works for the Jills, Panthers,
and other losers, add tagged players and lower the cost for tagging,
extend the time to earn FA, and no one will be able to maintain decent
personnel.
Harlan
Beiselbub©
> Branch --- "They aren’t used to being in that
> position, and this was their Super Bowl. But it wasn’t our Super Bowl.
> This was probably their Super Bowl and that is probably why they were
> acting that way."
Seems Branch was right. Bart Scott sure acted like he had just won the
Super Bowl last week, didn't he? "Anybody can be beat!" *caveman
yell* *airplane dance*
The Jets won *their* SB, and lost the AFC championship game.
Branch was right.
--
Bart Scott said it best, "anybody can be beat." So true.