angryfan62 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Boom, right now Hawks may just have this figured out.
MDH Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:26 AM, KikoSeeBallKikoGetBall said: He has NO receivers or tight ends. The entire passing game is all him. I've seen Brady play quite a few years of his career with very little at the WR position. Top tier QBs make WRs look good. That's the type of guy you make the highest paid QB in the league. Giving a QB that type of deal means you are going to be an incomplete team because you suddenly can't pay players at a lot of other positions. The trade off is that the QB more than makes up for that. Can Wilson do that? Can he make up for a non elite D and an O with holes at a lot of positions?
YoloinOhio Posted February 2, 2015 Author Posted February 2, 2015 That big passing play just opened it all up for lynch. What a throw and catch.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:35 AM, MDH said: I've seen Brady play quite a few years of his career with very little at the WR position. Top tier QBs make WRs look good. That's the type of guy you make the highest paid QB in the league. Giving a QB that type of deal means you are going to be an incomplete team because you suddenly can't pay players at a lot of other positions. The trade off is that the QB more than makes up for that. Can Wilson do that? Can he make up for a non elite D and an O with holes at a lot of positions? Yes and yes. I don't see any indication that he cannot. He is not the same kind of QB as Manning or Brady, but the results are similar.
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 once again, cc needs to stfu he is in love with brady they denied it, therefore they must be telling the truth ok cc
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:39 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: once again, cc needs to stfu he is in love with brady they denied it, therefore they must be telling the truth ok cc I don't think he said or implied that at all.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:35 AM, MDH said: I've seen Brady play quite a few years of his career with very little at the WR position. Top tier QBs make WRs look good. That's the type of guy you make the highest paid QB in the league. Giving a QB that type of deal means you are going to be an incomplete team because you suddenly can't pay players at a lot of other positions. The trade off is that the QB more than makes up for that. Can Wilson do that? Can he make up for a non elite D and an O with holes at a lot of positions? He has. You have seen a poor and limited sampling from a young qb He might win his 2nd super bowl in just 3 years tonight. Whether he will earn every dollar Brady does may be up for debate but there's no way to say he can't based on the last couple years.
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:40 AM, Kelly the Dog said: I don't think he said or implied that at all. he most certainly implied that he gave them the third degree and they were steadfast in their denials, therefore they are innocent
LB3 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:35 AM, MDH said: I've seen Brady play quite a few years of his career with very little at the WR position. Top tier QBs make WRs look good. That's the type of guy you make the highest paid QB in the league. Giving a QB that type of deal means you are going to be an incomplete team because you suddenly can't pay players at a lot of other positions. The trade off is that the QB more than makes up for that. Can Wilson do that? Can he make up for a non elite D and an O with holes at a lot of positions? I think he can. They'll occasionally struggle when facing teams with secondaries like NE's, but the rest of the time he'll make up the difference.
BRH Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:40 AM, Kelly the Dog said: I don't think he said or implied that at all. "I could not have been more direct in my questioning and they all denied knowing anything." Period. I think he needs to say whether he believes them.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:41 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: he most certainly implied that he gave them the third degree and they were steadfast in their denials, therefore they are innocent It's those last four words where I think what you heard is different than what we did. He spoke with them and it's an anecdote about the interviews this week. I didn't catch him assert anything beyond the nature of the conversation
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:41 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: he most certainly implied that he gave them the third degree and they were steadfast in their denials, therefore they are innocent That is not what that means at all. It means he asked them, they totally denied it, and he, Collinsworth, has no opinion of it either way. On 2/2/2015 at 12:42 AM, BRH said: "I could not have been more direct in my questioning and they all denied knowing anything." Period. I think he needs to say whether he believes them. On 2/2/2015 at 12:42 AM, BRH said: "I could not have been more direct in my questioning and they all denied knowing anything." Period. I think he needs to say whether he believes them. He's not supposed to.
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:42 AM, BRH said: "I could not have been more direct in my questioning and they all denied knowing anything." Period. I think he needs to say whether he believes them. his next statement had to do with Kraft's demand for an apology I think implied they are entitled to one
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:43 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: his next statement had to do with Kraft's demand for an apology I think implied they are entitled to one I think your distaste for him and the pats is coloring your interpretation here.
YoloinOhio Posted February 2, 2015 Author Posted February 2, 2015 The word is lynch grabbed his junk on the TD and that's why the cameras were stuck on the coaches afterward. He will be fined, again. But I thought they said he would be flagged.
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:45 AM, NoSaint said: I think your distaste for him and the pats is coloring your interpretation here. the beers may be helping too lol
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:45 AM, YoloinOhio said: The word is lynch grabbed his junk on the TD and that's why the cameras were stuck on the coaches afterward. He will be fined, again. But I thought they said he would be flagged. Maybe the refs had a bad angle? Amazing he'd risk it if he did it.... On 2/2/2015 at 12:46 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: the beers may be helping too lol Cheers!
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 On 2/2/2015 at 12:46 AM, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said: the beers may be helping too lol
Recommended Posts