Rumor: Moss to Big D (1 Viewer)

[Bick]

Mastermind and PFT both mentioned this one. Now THAT circus would be worth the price of admission! TO could supply the popcorn.

 

[TheGreatest]

Doutbful....

http://sports.aol.com/voices/jensen/_a/mos...226105209990001

 

[trader jake]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)

Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

 

[TheGreatest]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

Thats not going to happen....

 

[Rodeojones]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

He would have a better chance of winning a title in the NFC with Romo and the boys.

 

[Bossman]

Patriots have already freed up cap space by releasing LB Rosevelt Colvin and S Eugene Wilson.

Look for an announcement on Moss to stay in NE at the end of the month.

 

[Godsbrother]

Patriots have already freed up cap space by releasing LB Rosevelt Colvin and S Eugene Wilson.Look for an announcement on Moss to stay in NE at the end of the month.

As much as I wish it won't happen, this is what WILL happen. I will be very surprised if the Pats and Moss don't come to an agreement.

 

[Routilla]

I would not be surprised to see Moss go somewhere else, even Dallas. NE went 18-0 before losing the most important game of the season. I wonder what Moss thinks about his chances of winning a SB in NE. I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

 

[dgreen]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

 

[3nOut]

As a Moss owner, I don't think i like this rumor. The value of Moss and TO both drop with this move as they will both cut into each others' numbers and the change of at least one of them becoming disgruntled goes up. I doubt, however, that this happens. Moss wants to win a championship and Brady gives him a better chance than Romo. Moss is also the star receiver in NE, in Dallas he would have to share the limelight. Egos go a long way in the NFL.

2 days 'til free agency begins...

 

[mozzy84]

moss would not want to share with TO imo, I just don't see those two getting along at all.

 

[Cawbird]

Just imagine the running lanes that would open up for Barber III if this miracle were to happen!

Barber Dynasty owner here!

 

[Phurfur]

Dallas has been rumored to be signing so may guys there is not enough room on their roster. Moss, Walker, Fitz, Roy Williams, McFadden but not a DB in the group. I see Jerry Jones has the circus back in town.

 

[Bick]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

He would have a better chance of winning a title in the NFC with Romo and the boys.

If there's any owner with the stones to make that kind of a splash, it's Jones. And yeah, Moss going to Big D would make them the favorite over the Pats. Talk about a dynamic duo...

 

[Phurfur]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

He would have a better chance of winning a title in the NFC with Romo and the boys.

If there's any owner with the stones to make that kind of a splash, it's Jones. And yeah, Moss going to Big D would make them the favorite over the Pats. Talk about a dynamic duo...

Yeah and everyone had the 'Boys as the favorites in the NFC last year too. I get sick of hearing all this about a team that hasn't won a playoff game in over a decade.

 

[Routilla]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

 

[Phurfur]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

Do you think Moss will have a better year than last year or have a bigger impact somewhere else somewhere else?

 

[Ron_Mexico]

He would have a better chance of winning a title in the NFC with Romo and the boys.

right.

 

[Warhogs]

Just speculation on my part but I could easily see New England not bringing Moss back and instead spending their money to shore up the aging defensive side of the ball. New England has won superbowls prior to Moss but they are getting pretty old on defense. I just don't see it as a slam dunk they keep Moss.

 

[Bossman]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

Moss breaks the single season TD record in NE. You think he would be happier elsewhere?You people are off your rocker.

 

[moondog]

This was all over the sports radio shows here in DFW yesterday. Jones gave an interview to the local paper where he said he wants to put the Wow factor into the Dallas offense. He specifically said he has no interest in trading up to take Mcfadden. TO is in the final year of his contract also and is 4 years older than Moss. Jones has often said passing on Moss in the draft was one of the biggest mistakes he has made.

 

[Bankerguy]

Reports have already said he has agreed to a deal with NE.

 

[Bick]

Just speculation on my part but I could easily see New England not bringing Moss back and instead spending their money to shore up the aging defensive side of the ball. New England has won superbowls prior to Moss but they are getting pretty old on defense. I just don't see it as a slam dunk they keep Moss.

Amen brother.All the offensive weapons in the world wasn't enough to beat an average offense w/ a better D a few weeks ago. They ABSOLUTELY need to shore up the D, especially if/when Samuel leaves.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Just speculation on my part but I could easily see New England not bringing Moss back and instead spending their money to shore up the aging defensive side of the ball. New England has won superbowls prior to Moss but they are getting pretty old on defense. I just don't see it as a slam dunk they keep Moss.

Amen brother.All the offensive weapons in the world wasn't enough to beat an average offense w/ a better D a few weeks ago. They ABSOLUTELY need to shore up the D, especially if/when Samuel leaves.

This is goofy. The D gave up 17 points. When you score less than 20, you should expect to lose in the playoffs.

 

[Routilla]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

Moss breaks the single season TD record in NE. You think he would be happier elsewhere?You people are off your rocker.

I thought he was trying to win a SB. If he was only looking for records then he has accomplished his goals.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

 

[Routilla]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

Do you think Moss will have a better year than last year or have a bigger impact somewhere else somewhere else?

I don't know about having a bigger year or impact. But it would seem like all those records didn't mean that much to him if he was trying to win a SB. If he only wanted records then he achieved his primary objective.

 

[Routilla]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

 

[David Yudkin]

1) Moss is not going anywhere, so why all these rumors and reports where Moss is going seems pretty silly in my book.

2) In the Brady/Belichick era, NE has averaged 14.3 wins per season (regular and post season). Those saying if Moss wants a ring he should look elsewhere are nuts.

3) I have heard for years in the off season that NE is done, their team is a wreck, their defense is old and falling apart, etc. But they continue to field a competive team. Write them off if you want, but don't commplain when they are in the thinck of the SB hunt again.

 

[Bankerguy]

1) Moss is not going anywhere, so why all these rumors and reports where Moss is going seems pretty silly in my book.2) In the Brady/Belichick era, NE has averaged 14.3 wins per season (regular and post season). Those saying if Moss wants a ring he should look elsewhere are nuts.3) I have heard for years in the off season that NE is done, their team is a wreck, their defense is old and falling apart, etc. But they continue to field a competive team. Write them off if you want, but don't commplain when they are in the thinck of the SB hunt again.

 

[Banger]

Moss is going nowhere. He's probably the most valuable player on the team behind Brady.

 

[Routilla]

1) Moss is not going anywhere, so why all these rumors and reports where Moss is going seems pretty silly in my book.2) In the Brady/Belichick era, NE has averaged 14.3 wins per season (regular and post season). Those saying if Moss wants a ring he should look elsewhere are nuts.3) I have heard for years in the off season that NE is done, their team is a wreck, their defense is old and falling apart, etc. But they continue to field a competive team. Write them off if you want, but don't commplain when they are in the thinck of the SB hunt again.

Not sure if you were directing your comments to me but I would like to clarify if that is the case. I am not saying Moss should look elsewhere or that NE is done, a wreck etc. I am assuming that Moss signed with NE to win a SB. I am also assuming that when sitting at 18-0 heading into the SB against a wild card NFC representative, Moss and every other Patriot probably felt like winning the SB was a foregone conclusion. After the loss, I am only stating that Moss may be willing to try elsewhere seeing as how it didn't pan out on what was being considered the GOAT prior to the SB loss. My rational is that if undefeated isn't good enough to put you over the top and win a SB(from Moss' standpoint), then it would not surprise me to see him try with Dallas or some other team that could reach the pinnacle with his addition. I am not saying it is likely or that he should leave NE, only that it would not surprise me if indeed he does leave. From NE's standpoint, they have to have him in order to compete for the SB in '09, IMO of course.

 

[GreenNGold]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

NE is not going to win another superbowl for a very long time.

 

[Banger]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

NE is not going to win another superbowl for a very long time.

did their team die in a plane crash that I didn't hear about? One month ago they were 2 minutes from winning one if I recall. The draft hasn't occurred and free agency has started. There's a lot of time between now and the beginning of the year to plug a few holes.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

NE is not going to win another superbowl for a very long time.

Do you have data to back up this overarching absolute?

 

[Moe Green]

Moss is going nowhere. He's probably the most valuable player on the team behind Brady.

Probably?

 

[Routilla]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

NE is not going to win another superbowl for a very long time.

Do you have data to back up this overarching absolute?

Any data would not be available until the events(SBs) have been played and the outcomes are known(either NE wins a SB or does not). Either way it can only be considered a hunch or prediction due to the nature of the unknown outcomes.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

I was speaking in terms of Moss, sorry if I didn't clarify that. Moss went to NE to win a SB. My point is that if Moss/NE can go undefeated yet still lose the game that mattered most(to Moss), I would not be surprised to see Moss look for a shot elsewhere. It will also be interesting to see how NE does post Spygate. If they fall back to the pack then there may indeed have been something to the taping and clear advantages on the field.

You're missing the point. Upsets happen, but Moss has the best chance of winning a SB with the Pats right now.

He had a great chance about a month ago. Some would say Moss could not have had a better chance in his lifetime.

Again, you're missing the point. Let's say the Pats had a 90% chance of winning that game, so yes, the best chance in Moss's lifetime. The 10% happens one out of every ten times. It happens.Let's say the Pats are a bit worse next year, and only have a 50% chance of winning. Moss would still be best-served resigning with the Patriots.

NE is not going to win another superbowl for a very long time.

Do you have data to back up this overarching absolute?

Any data would not be available until the events(SBs) have been played and the outcomes are known(either NE wins a SB or does not). Either way it can only be considered a hunch or prediction due to the nature of the unknown outcomes.

This guy gets it.

 

[switz]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

 

[switz]

The D gave up 17 points.

... to Eli Manning...

 

[Workhorse]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[switz]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

Nope, they were pretty bad. They benefitted greatly from the pressure their offense put on the opponent. Most of the Patriots opponents became one dimensional, which is much easier to defend. However, as a defense alone, they were not very good.

 

[Tanner9919]

Before this thread fills up with a bunch of "that's not going to happen" posts (which I agree with)Unless the Pats horribly lowball him Randy Moss would be wise to stay in New England.

thats simply NOT going to happen.. this is a ploy to motivate Bell, Tatum

 

[Workhorse]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

Nope, they were pretty bad. They benefitted greatly from the pressure their offense put on the opponent. Most of the Patriots opponents became one dimensional, which is much easier to defend. However, as a defense alone, they were not very good.

In 3 playoff games, where their offense was less effective, the Patriots defense allowed a total of 4 TDs and an average of 16 ppg. They allowed over 17 ppg in the regular season when their offense was "putting pressure on opponents". Not sure what your point is here...

 

[Big Daddy Kane]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

Nope, they were pretty bad. They benefitted greatly from the pressure their offense put on the opponent. Most of the Patriots opponents became one dimensional, which is much easier to defend. However, as a defense alone, they were not very good.

easy to play defense when your offense puts you up by 21. However, when the games were close and opposing teams could stay balanced the Patriots defense looked average at best.

 

[switz]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

Nope, they were pretty bad. They benefitted greatly from the pressure their offense put on the opponent. Most of the Patriots opponents became one dimensional, which is much easier to defend. However, as a defense alone, they were not very good.

In 3 playoff games, where their offense was less effective, the Patriots defense allowed a total of 4 TDs and an average of 16 ppg. They allowed over 17 ppg in the regular season when their offense was "putting pressure on opponents". Not sure what your point is here...

JAX - not a great offense, put up 20 points (the "less effective" offense put up 31)SD - without it's key players, w/ an injured QB - not exactly how you measure a defenses ability... heck the fact SD scored at all makes NE's D look badNYG - Eli Manning beat them... is there anything else to say?I wouldn't use those playoff games as a measure of the defenses ability at all... they face 3 weak/injured offenses

 

[David Yudkin]

Switz once again paints his brush from the paint of glittering generalities.

Points allowed per game in the post-season:

2007: 16.33 (lost SB)

2006: 25.00 (lost AFCC)

2005: 15.00 (lost Divisional round)

2004: 17.00 (won SB)

2003: 19.00 (won SB)

2001: 15.67 (won SB)

NE's post season defense allowed fewer points than two of their SB teams (and allowed only 2 more points total than the other). Bottom line, the Pats could have allowed 10 ppg in the regular season and it would not have made any difference against hte Giants, so the claims of great offense, terrible defense are way overhyped.

And FWIW, a team scoring only 14 points has won exactly one SB title (ironically enough the 72 Dolphins). People can try to spin it htat the defense lost the title, but the offense didn't show up against the Giants (and the NY defense had a lot to do with that).

 

[Banger]

I mean come on, if they can't win one after a perfect season then when can they win one?

2001, 2003, and 2004?

They were cheating then....No, seriously.. their defense won for them those years, and now they've changed their personnel to be an offensive juggernaut. Problem is that offensive juggernauts with bad defenses usually don't win the big game.

You'd be hard pressed to call the 2007 Patriots defense "bad", by any stretch of the imagination.

Nope, they were pretty bad. They benefitted greatly from the pressure their offense put on the opponent. Most of the Patriots opponents became one dimensional, which is much easier to defend. However, as a defense alone, they were not very good.

In 3 playoff games, where their offense was less effective, the Patriots defense allowed a total of 4 TDs and an average of 16 ppg. They allowed over 17 ppg in the regular season when their offense was "putting pressure on opponents". Not sure what your point is here...

JAX - not a great offense, put up 20 points (the "less effective" offense put up 31)SD - without it's key players, w/ an injured QB - not exactly how you measure a defenses ability... heck the fact SD scored at all makes NE's D look badNYG - Eli Manning beat them... is there anything else to say?I wouldn't use those playoff games as a measure of the defenses ability at all... they face 3 weak/injured offenses

I'm sure 20+ teams would swap their defense for the "bad" Pats d.

 

[switz]

Switz once again paints his brush from the paint of glittering generalities.Points allowed per game in the post-season:2007: 16.33 (lost SB)2006: 25.00 (lost AFCC)2005: 15.00 (lost Divisional round)2004: 17.00 (won SB)2003: 19.00 (won SB)2001: 15.67 (won SB)NE's post season defense allowed fewer points than two of their SB teams (and allowed only 2 more points total than the other). Bottom line, the Pats could have allowed 10 ppg in the regular season and it would not have made any difference against hte Giants, so the claims of great offense, terrible defense are way overhyped.And FWIW, a team scoring only 14 points has won exactly one SB title (ironically enough the 72 Dolphins). People can try to spin it htat the defense lost the title, but the offense didn't show up against the Giants (and the NY defense had a lot to do with that).

Nice subtle personal attack there Yudkin...Aren't you ignoring the opponents? And why are we limiting our conversation to the postseason? And the context of the games? As I said, with their high octane offense, they forced most of their opponents into a one-dimensional offense. When you do that, you are able to hide many of your defensive weaknesses.I think it's rather evident that in 2006 without the powerful offense, their defensive deficiencies were apparent, and that is one of the main reasons that the FO went out and built the powerful offense in '07. It was easier for them to add three WRs than to cover all the weak areas of their defense. I'm really surprised that you, with your tremendous football acumen, can't acknowledge that. Disappointed.