Hollywood Donahoe

Pats just need to get younger in a lot of areas. They could look at RB, since they've now been burned TWICE by giving a big extension to a 30+ year old back. They definitely need help in the secondary and some youth at LB. A big time WR might be nice as well. Mostly, I just want guys who don't get injured every time they plant wrong.

Link (the '05 league leader in deep pass attempts, McNabb, went "to the well" 1.6 times per game) Much more fun to make someone look foolish by using actual, rather than fabricated, comments.

Where'd I say that? I was merely commenting on your absurd Warner/Brady comparison.

Sad that you Brady/Warner comparison was made to look laughably stupid?

Leave me out of your generalizations. I'm not a Red Sox fan, I don't live in Massachusetts, and I will never stop rooting for the Patriots.

Well, Dillon in 2004 was better than Antowain ever was for us, but Patrick Pass has certainly run better this year.

Indeed.

The Patriots were not down by seven at any time in the second half. But don't let facts get in the way of your invective-ridden rant. As for those fans leaving, it was lame to see, even if the game was all but over. That said, what's it got to do with me?

Sadly, yeah. Uncalled for. Grow up. You'll get no argument from me. Our defense can't get off the field on 3rd down, our WRs can't catch, Dillon is dancing instead of hitting holes, and our OL sucks. The only redeeming quality is Brady, but he, apparently, can win only every other game by himself.

Where are Warner's two other Lombardi trophies?

He did?

That his teammate, McNabb, is so horrible that the team would be better if Brett "5 INT" Favre were the QB? There's absolutely no excuse for regularly belittling your own teammates.

A mediocre Rams team was dominating them until they lost Bulger. I remain cautiously optimistic about Monday night.

No argument from me there. I was referring the Pats '01-'04 dynasty, particularly the last two years. As for this actual topic, I just had a chance to watch my tape of the game, and can confirm that the call on the Branch catch was correct. The ball hits the ground, but there's no visual evidence that his forearm is not under the ball (his upper arm blocks the view). One can conclude, though, that his arm was indeed under the ball, for the following reason. As Branch bounces off the turf, the ball follows the EXACT same trajectory. It does not lag behind in the least. Therefore, if it was supported by his arm well enough to bring it up with him when he bounced, then he must've had enough control for it to be a catch.

Try telling that to the teams that lost 34 games to them in '03-'04.

Rosevelt Colvin?

Let's not talk about that. But hey, did anyone see Moulds get flagged for shoving Samuel to the ground? What BS!

At the end of the first half, I was shouting at the TV to stop talking about Bruschi and start talking about the team that was dominating the Super Bowl champs in their house.

I can only imagine how pissed you guys would be if the Bills were penalized for committing an "unnatural act."

You guys did get screwed on those two plays. On the 4th down, the Pats left a guy wide open deep down the middle of the field, but the ref noticed and dragged him to the ground. Damn refs!

I believe the refs and the TV producers are working from the same set of angles. That, evidently, was the only one that produced a workable view of the play.

They'll have to edit out the part where McGahee got most of his yards up the middle.

Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Nah.

So you think they should've overturned it, even though the ball and its relation to the ground were blocked by Branch's arm? Why? Just 'cause? I'm not saying it didn't hit the ground - it may have. But the view was not conclusive either way.