No, he actually had seizures on the way to the airport for the KC game back in November. It sounds pretty serious.Ed Hillel said:For "seizures". Is that a clever ploy for "played through a concussion?"
Corrente worked the Patriots-Saints game this year and also worked the Houston playoff game last year.mpx42 said:Tony Corrente is our official for Sunday. pic.twitter.com/Fe01exU92b
But Corrente can set a tone, and I find your second stat encouraging and more meaningful than the first.RedOctober3829 said:Corrente worked the Patriots-Saints game this year and also worked the Houston playoff game last year.
One stat that I do not like with Corrente is that this season home teams have a winning percentage of .800, but his crew only called 5 more penalties on the road team than the home team. Of course, if there are all-star crews these stats won't mean much.
Wolfe got blown up in the preseason in Seattle. He left on a stretcher with a neck injury that kept him out the rest of the preseason.Ed Hillel said:Yeah, I didn't phrase it well, but I was wondering if it was a hit to the head yhat triggered it/them. That article seems to indicate it may well be the case. I don't remember him being stretchered off the field with a head/neck issue.
brandonchristensen said:Just found out I will be in Florida shooting all day during the game. I will need to get that audio package and just have an earphone in.
Not happy about that.
Please show your math on this one.SemperFidelisSox said:The more I think about this game and legacies, the more I think Brady needs it just as much as Manning.
No question there.Stitch01 said:Both quarterbacks have secure legacies as inner circle Hall Of Famers
Why would you hold 01-04 against him? Manning has never had a stretch like that. You are only dinging Brady for post-05 if you hold him to his own lofty standard.SemperFidelisSox said:For starters, Brady has not won in the postseason with as much consistency as he did at the beginning of his career (2001-2004). More importantly, his performances in conference championship and Super Bowls since '04 have been average at best, with a losing record to go along with it (2-4). Five of his eight playoff wins since the teams last Super Bowl have been in the divisional round, as have the majority of his best games statistically.
SemperFidelisSox said:For starters, Brady has not won in the postseason with as much consistency as he did at the beginning of his career (2001-2004). More importantly, his performances in conference championship and Super Bowls since '04 have been average at best, with a losing record to go along with it (2-4). Five of his eight playoff wins since the teams last Super Bowl have been in the divisional round, as have the majority of his best games statistically.
I decided see how the "no ring" test would apply to the NFL's elite QBs of the SB era. So I subtracted out their SB wins to see what their W/L records was in years they did not win the ultimate prize.drleather2001 said:Is it fair to say that, even without 01-04, Brady would be a borderline HOF player? He's led the league in yards twice, TDs twice, has had an impeccable TD/INT ratio, an amazing record, and guided his team to the Super Bowl twice.
Yes, the knock on him would be "no ring", but aside from that he's basically been better than anyone not named Manning or Brees. I'd argue he's been better than Rodgers.
Id argue '10-'12 teams were all as good or (likely) better than the '03 team and almost as good as the '04 team. DVOA would make stronger arguments. That '04 team was a monster, the '03 team parlayed 8 one score victories into a very favorable playoff run (homefield, both games in adverse elements, drew the Panthers in the Super Bowl).dcmissle said:Brady's playoff record through 2004 was unsustainable period. It was particularly so because after 2004, with the exception of 2007, the Pats teams have not been as good as they were in 2003-04. Did Brady contribute to this? Yes. Among other things, along with the team, he shit the bed in the 2005 playoff game in Denver, which was a pivot point of sorts. But you can't do it by yourself, even with a GOAT HC.
If you take away the rings, I'm not at all sure Brady is a HOF'er. Canton is tough. Bledsoe accumulated stats like a madman and won't get in.
I'd argue that the pressure on Manning should be greater on Sunday. The game is at home. Yes the Broncos are wounded, but the Pats are more so. And Brady is younger, with perhaps more time left in his career.
We're losing perspective. Give this Pats team to any other HC, and it probably would have been 9 and 7, 10 at 6 at the best, and probably not playing Sunday. Indeed, if you gave this injured squad to a lot of HCs, everything might well have come apart after Gronk went down.
dcmissle said:he shit the bed in the 2005 playoff game in Denver, which was a pivot point of sorts.
Pats only got called for one PI that game. You might be thinking of the regular season loss featuring a career ending performance from Duane Starks.Rico Guapo said:
I remember the awful end zone pick he threw to Champ Bailey that resulted in the famous Watson chasedown...but I mostly remember the Pats getting called for two or three absolutely bullshit PI calls that led to lots of points for the Broncos, not Brady blowing the game.
His stat line was pretty pedestrian 20 of 36 for 341 1 TD 2 INT but he was playing the game with a sports hernia...
edit: Looked at the game log, the Pats also fumbled three times that day.
One of the painful aspects of the Jets loss was they ran the ball great at the end of the game against the sub-defense but it was too late. That loss stinks but they were transitioning to the TE dominated offenses of 2011-12. Hernandez only had 1 catch in that game for 4 yards. Plus they were done in by Cotchery who has always killed them. Strange game they had the ball all day (34:56) and could not score.
The Jets (’10), Giants (’11) and Ravens (’12) played their base defense a total of 14 of 195 total snaps (7.2 percent) when they held the Patriots to 21 (garbage-time touchdown included), 17 and 13 points, respectively. The rest was nickel or dime defense with extra defensive backs. Basically, the defenses dared the Patriots to forego their passing attack and run the ball.
The Patriots attempted to run the ball, but couldn’t do it effectively enough to pull the defenses out of playing coverage. They averaged 3.5 yards per attempt in the first half of those games. Since the defenses felt no need to drop a safety down into the box—or swap a linebacker for a defensive back—to help against the run, Brady had a tough time finding players open. He completed 60 percent of his passes in those losses and was knocked around by the pass rush, which had time to get there.
ShaneTrot said:Bedard has a great column this week about the Pats and the running game and their last three playoff failures.
One of the painful aspects of the Jets loss was they ran the ball great at the end of the game against the sub-defense but it was too late. That loss stinks but they were transitioning to the TE dominated offenses of 2011-12. Hernandez only had 1 catch in that game for 4 yards. Plus they were done in by Cotchery who has always killed them. Strange game they had the ball all day (34:56) and could not score.
If they can run enough to get Denver to cheat the safeties up, that would be great.
Eric Ampersand said:Perhaps the success rate of the Broncos stopping the run is due to only having to play the run for one quarter. Denver opponents run the ball only 39% of their plays which ranks fifth least. This is essentially the same defense that the Pats ran all over last year with Ridley and Bolden.
Sorry, couldn't disagree more. First of all, Bledsoe is a ridiculous comparison. Brady's numbers relative to his peers are far better than Bledsoe's. As one example, Bledsoe finished in the top 10 for passer rating only 3 times on his career--and never higher than 6th. Brady finished in the top 10 11 times and was #1 twice.dcmissle said:Brady's playoff record through 2004 was unsustainable period. It was particularly so because after 2004, with the exception of 2007, the Pats teams have not been as good as they were in 2003-04. Did Brady contribute to this? Yes. Among other things, along with the team, he shit the bed in the 2005 playoff game in Denver, which was a pivot point of sorts. But you can't do it by yourself, even with a GOAT HC.
If you take away the rings, I'm not at all sure Brady is a HOF'er. Canton is tough. Bledsoe accumulated stats like a madman and won't get in.
I'd argue that the pressure on Manning should be greater on Sunday. The game is at home. Yes the Broncos are wounded, but the Pats are more so. And Brady is younger, with perhaps more time left in his career.
We're losing perspective. Give this Pats team to any other HC, and it probably would have been 9 and 7, 10 at 6 at the best, and probably not playing Sunday. Indeed, if you gave this injured squad to a lot of HCs, everything might well have come apart after Gronk went down.
I'm not sure I agree with this (as noted above, both of their legacies are pretty secure), but in terms of how they compare head to head, this is pretty important for both. For most of their careers, Brady was the guy who got the big wins, Manning got the stats and the awards. This was especially true when they last met...Brady had 3 super bowl wins in his first 5 seasons, Manning had a bunch of records, 3 straight All Pro nods, and a couple of MVPs. Then, Manning won a Super Bowl, Brady got a couple of MVPs, and here we are.SemperFidelisSox said:The more I think about this game and legacies, the more I think Brady needs it just as much as Manning.