Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

New England Patriots 2019 Outlook


dschddny
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, SyNdicateZ said:

Whos the Pats starting QB next year? I say Brady. cant see him in a diff uni. Jordon was weird in a frikkin WIZARDS uni. 

 

 For practical purposes i can see them giving Brady a 3yr contract knowing they will draft a franchise QB in year 2or 3 and see if they can get 1 more title with him.

If mcdaniels leaves I would if I'm the Pats focus on a semi-rebuild where they tweak the defense, rebuild the wr room and bring in a renovation project like mariota or a cheap gunslinger like keenum as they look to draft a QB next year and avoid the when will Brady be replaced by a rookie controversey. 

The fact is you cant rebuild with Brady on the roster he has to retire or go to another team. He wont mentor rookies, he wont lose the job in camp competition and he wont suffer through the losing of a rebuild.

Personally I think Bridgewater is teh right fit for Hoodie because he is an intelligent QB with athleticism but his price in FA will be too high and Sean will probably convince him he is the heir apparent to Brees.

Edited by dashoe
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dashoe said:

 

 For practical purposes i can see them giving Brady a 3yr contract knowing they will draft a franchise QB in year 2or 3 and see if they can get 1 more title with him.

If mcdaniels leaves I would if I'm the Pats focus on a semi-rebuild where they tweak the defense, rebuild the wr room and bring in a renovation project like mariota or a cheap gunslinger like keenum as they look to draft a QB next year and avoid the when will Brady be replaced by a rookie controversey. 

The fact is you cant rebuild with Brady on the roster he has to retire or go to another team. He wont mentor rookies, he wont lose the job in camp competition and he wont suffer through the losing of a rebuild.

Personally I think Bridgewater is teh right fit for Hoodie because he is an intelligent QB with athleticism but his price in FA will be too high and Sean will probably convince him he is the heir apparent to Brees.

 

The thing about Brady leaving is they will have like 13 Mill in dead cap space. Stidham makes 1 mill. Add Teddy and you are at 30 mill for a QB.

 

I like Teddy most out of the available QBS though, agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sSektor said:

I hope McDaniels leaves. His stubborn, gun-shy playcalling just hasn't been cutting it the last couple seasons.

Agreed.  It sucks winning bowls in 2017 and 2019.  Bum should of called better plays to win in 2018.  Unreal.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dmb3684 said:

 

He should be fired for them not scoring on 1st and goal from the 1.

 

I’m just more upset with how he just absolutely refuses to change the offense to involve the rookies. They clearly weren’t going to be good at making the route adjustments so Brady was left with literally just Edelman and White running to the correct spots. Defenses didn’t respect the run game, Harry, Meyers, Dorsett, or the TE this season and that is on McDaniels being too stubborn to dumb things down so they could get involved.

Edited by sSektor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, sSektor said:

 

I’m just more upset with how he just absolutely refuses to change the offense to involve the rookies. They clearly weren’t going to be good at making the route adjustments so Brady was left with literally just Edelman and White running to the correct spots. Defenses didn’t respect the run game, Harry, Meyers, Dorsett, or the TE this season and that is on McDaniels being too stubborn to dumb things down so they could get involved.

 

TB wasn't gonna throw to those guys regardless of the game plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dmb3684 said:

 

TB wasn't gonna throw to those guys regardless of the game plan.

 

TB always tries to spread the ball around to the open guy especially when Edelman is routinely doubled. Only issue was Harry basically only got the ball on end-arounds lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, sSektor said:

 

TB always tries to spread the ball around to the open guy especially when Edelman is routinely doubled. Only issue was Harry basically only got the ball on end-arounds lol

 

Nah

 He throws to guys he trusts. He was throwing those dudes under the bus all season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/11/2020 at 1:23 PM, dmb3684 said:

 

Nah

 He throws to guys he trusts. He was throwing those dudes under the bus all season.

 

Agreed. TB12 has never had much patience with receivers that aren't on the same page or are struggling to pick up an offense predicated on option routes. Especially now that his in his twilight years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2020 at 11:45 AM, BMcP said:

It’s again worthwhile pointing out how useless and non-credible “ESPN” is as a sports news source.

 

Bahahahahhaa. 

 

Oh now ESPN is a bad source? Seemed like a valid one during deflategate.

 

You can't make this stuff up.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, dmb3684 said:

 

Bahahahahhaa. 

 

Oh now ESPN is a bad source? Seemed like a valid one during deflategate.

 

You can't make this stuff up.

 

Or the Bengals taping fiasco, or really anything negative that is "reported" about New England. When it's negative, Dianna Russini and the whole gang at ESPN are nothing but credible reporters. But if it's positive about New England, just the opposite apparently. Fascinating how both sides of the line somehow hold true (in their minds) to so many haters when it comes to the New England Patriots.

You really can't make this stuff up. Lol.

Edited by ThreadKiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny enough, after posting a link to the complete findings of the deflategate investigation not a single defender responded.  Not a single one was able to debate the findings from an actual scientific basis.  "Biased source!" "Witch Hunt!" "Just jealous!" BS.  Here's another shot at it: 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/06/sports/football/07deflate-doc.html

Would LOVE to hear an actual scientific explanation to refute these findings.  I'll wait...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilarious.  The future HOfer directly involved refused to fully exercise his right of appeal as opposed to clearing his good name.  “Deflaltor” makes for excellent comedy from the Patriots franchise.  Hope that poor guy made a good job of his weight loss.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

Funny enough, after posting a link to the complete findings of the deflategate investigation not a single defender responded.  Not a single one was able to debate the findings from an actual scientific basis.  "Biased source!" "Witch Hunt!" "Just jealous!" BS.  Here's another shot at it: 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/06/sports/football/07deflate-doc.html

Would LOVE to hear an actual scientific explanation to refute these findings.  I'll wait...

Here you go....

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, fletch44 said:

Here you go....

 

 

 

It's an interesting lecture but few big things are off here:

1) The video skips at where he gets the timelines for when the Pats and Colts measure the ball but based on the time boxes he shows he has the time at which the patriots balls were measured as beginning at the halftime extending up to the first 6 minutes of the half.  The report has multiple witnesses and camera footage that say that they brought both bags of balls to the official's locker room, spent 2-4 minutes organizing the measurements, then 4-5 minutes testing the patriots balls.  Even on the lowest end of the estimate that's not possible in his timeframe (unless the balls were transported instantly to the locker room and then you take the absolute lowest measurement.  There's also nothing to suggest that they waited several minutes (at least 2 per the ranges he provides) between measuring the pats and colts balls as they describe going one by one assembly line fashion. They report shows they re-inflated the balls after measuring them all, not between or during like he's suggesting.

2) His criticism for their transient curves don't make a ton of sense. He argues they shouldn't be parallel but the graph in which they converge is measured over a period of 2 hours and even then weren't back to the same level. The pressure curve using the actual gauges over 13 minutes, of course they look more parallel. He also argues he doesn't know where they got the numbers from but they pretty clearly outline their methods in the paper. They also selected temperature ranges based on "values for the pre-game and halftime locker room temperatures shown in Figure 27 put the Patriots transient curves at their lowest possible positions. Any change in these temperatures within the allowed range that still permits the Colts transient curves to match the Colts halftime measurements will only push the Patriots transient curves up and make it more difficult to explain the observed readings by environmental and measurement process factors alone."

3) Averaging the 2 gauges readings makes the data easier to look at, but doesn't make sense.  There are slight differences in the gauges and their data really should be looked at separately.

4) He's making the assumption that the Patriots balls were wetter than the Colts balls because they were kept in a bag and the Patriots did not.  The report has witnesses describing how both teams kept several balls within a bag and dry the whole first half, made attempts to keep all the balls dry (ie the Patriots ball boys didn't just leave all their game balls out in the rain because of course they didn't that would be ridiculous), and that at halftime they described that "some but not all of the balls were moist at halftime but none were waterlogged"

TL;DR, in order for his analysis to approach being accurate the patriots balls would have had to been wetter than the colts balls and measured very early (likely impossibly early) on in the halftime, followed by a gap, then the colts balls measured all of which goes against what witnesses testimony and push the limits of what physically could have happened.  Those are a lot of huge stretches to make for someone who was not involved in the raw data collection and analysis.  Meanwhile we have damning text messages from a ballboy who took gameballs out of the locker room against protocol and is on camera bringing them to a separate bathroom before the game, Brady "randomly" deciding to destroy his phone.  Sure nothing to see there.

And before anyone starts mocking my audacity in criticizing the work of an MIT physics professor, keep in mind the original data was collected by guys with a Ph.D in Mechanical Engineering from Case Western, a Ph.D in Statistics from Carnegie Mellon, a Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering from Stanford, a Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering from Columbia, and a Ph.D in Aerospace Engineering from Stanford. All of whom have listened to the criticism of detractors including Jon Leonard and stick by their data.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

 

It's an interesting lecture but few big things are off here:

1) The video skips at where he gets the timelines for when the Pats and Colts measure the ball but based on the time boxes he shows he has the time at which the patriots balls were measured as beginning at the halftime extending up to the first 6 minutes of the half.  The report has multiple witnesses and camera footage that say that they brought both bags of balls to the official's locker room, spent 2-4 minutes organizing the measurements, then 4-5 minutes testing the patriots balls.  Even on the lowest end of the estimate that's not possible in his timeframe (unless the balls were transported instantly to the locker room and then you take the absolute lowest measurement.  There's also nothing to suggest that they waited several minutes (at least 2 per the ranges he provides) between measuring the pats and colts balls as they describe going one by one assembly line fashion. They report shows they re-inflated the balls after measuring them all, not between or during like he's suggesting.

2) His criticism for their transient curves don't make a ton of sense. He argues they shouldn't be parallel but the graph in which they converge is measured over a period of 2 hours and even then weren't back to the same level. The pressure curve using the actual gauges over 13 minutes, of course they look more parallel. He also argues he doesn't know where they got the numbers from but they pretty clearly outline their methods in the paper. They also selected temperature ranges based on "values for the pre-game and halftime locker room temperatures shown in Figure 27 put the Patriots transient curves at their lowest possible positions. Any change in these temperatures within the allowed range that still permits the Colts transient curves to match the Colts halftime measurements will only push the Patriots transient curves up and make it more difficult to explain the observed readings by environmental and measurement process factors alone."

3) Averaging the 2 gauges readings makes the data easier to look at, but doesn't make sense.  There are slight differences in the gauges and their data really should be looked at separately.

4) He's making the assumption that the Patriots balls were wetter than the Colts balls because they were kept in a bag and the Patriots did not.  The report has witnesses describing how both teams kept several balls within a bag and dry the whole first half, made attempts to keep all the balls dry (ie the Patriots ball boys didn't just leave all their game balls out in the rain because of course they didn't that would be ridiculous), and that at halftime they described that "some but not all of the balls were moist at halftime but none were waterlogged"

TL;DR, in order for his analysis to approach being accurate the patriots balls would have had to been wetter than the colts balls and measured very early (likely impossibly early) on in the halftime, followed by a gap, then the colts balls measured all of which goes against what witnesses testimony and push the limits of what physically could have happened.  Those are a lot of huge stretches to make for someone who was not involved in the raw data collection and analysis.  Meanwhile we have damning text messages from a ballboy who took gameballs out of the locker room against protocol and is on camera bringing them to a separate bathroom before the game, Brady "randomly" deciding to destroy his phone.  Sure nothing to see there.

And before anyone starts mocking my audacity in criticizing the work of an MIT physics professor, keep in mind the original data was collected by guys with a Ph.D in Mechanical Engineering from Case Western, a Ph.D in Statistics from Carnegie Mellon, a Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering from Stanford, a Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering from Columbia, and a Ph.D in Aerospace Engineering from Stanford. All of whom have listened to the criticism of detractors including Jon Leonard and stick by their data.

I’m not going to get too much into this because I won’t claim to be a mechanical engineer or physicist. At the very least the report was disputed by some of their peers. Make of that what you will. People can believe who they want. 

Question on the bolded above. I skimmed through the NYT link. Where does it say the original data was collected by all these engineers? It was my understanding the original data was collected by the NFL. An organization that while under oath admitted to not knowing what the ideal gas law was. That should tell you all you need to know about the validity of their data collection methods.

And I never understood the whole cellphone thing. I destroy my cellphone after I get a new one too. And you can be damn sure if my employer wanted to go through my cellphone, I’d be thinking about destroying it too. Now imagine if you’re a public figure and you’re employer is Roger Goodell. No thanks, I’d take the month suspension too.

Edited by fletch44
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, fletch44 said:

I’m not going to get too much into this because I won’t claim to be a mechanical engineer or physicist. At the very least the report was disputed by some of their peers. Make of that what you will. People can believe who they want. 

Question on the bolded above. I skimmed through the NYT link. Where does it say the original data was collected by all these engineers? It was my understanding the original data was collected by the NFL. An organization that while under oath admitted to not knowing what the ideal gas law was. That should tell you all you need to know about the validity of their data collection methods.

And I never understood the whole cellphone thing. I destroy my cellphone after I get a new one too. And you can be damn sure if my employer wanted to go through my cellphone, I’d be thinking about destroying it too. Now imagine if you’re a public figure and you’re employer is Roger Goodell. No thanks, I’d take the month suspension too.

 

The pressure readings at halftime were taken by NFL officials, who are trained and comfortable taking them.  The research data, predictive models, and number crunching were done by Exponent consulting firm. In the article the names of the researchers (which are spread out through the article unfortunately) have a hyperlink to their bio page which has their qualifications. Plus Exponent even looked into whether inter-examiner and inter-instrument error could have been a cause of the abnormal measurements and didn't find enough variability to explain the issues.

I mean I understand not wanting to give up your cell phone to people.  I'm sure his lawyers could have made sure that the only things looked at were limited to the scope of the investigation though. Plus the investigators requested access to the texts before he destroyed the phone.  Again I get it, but you gotta admit that's way too convenient to be a coincidence. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fletch44 said:

 

And I never understood the whole cellphone thing. I destroy my cellphone after I get a new one too. And you can be damn sure if my employer wanted to go through my cellphone, I’d be thinking about destroying it too. Now imagine if you’re a public figure and you’re employer is Roger Goodell. No thanks, I’d take the month suspension too.

 

Even the federal judge called BS on Brady's excuse for destroying his phone and made the point he could have been suspended for that act alone 🤣

 

 

While Kessler attempted to argue that Goodell’s ruling was fundamentally unfair and violated the league’s collective-bargaining agreement, the judges were focused on the fact that Brady destroyed his cellphone.

“Why couldn’t the commissioner suspend Brady for that conduct alone?” Judge Barrington Parker asked. “You have one of the most celebrated players performing in that fashion? Anybody within 100 yards of this proceeding knew that would raise the stakes.”

Kessler replied that Wells never asked Brady for his cellphone, and that Brady had provided investigators with his emails and the numbers that he had texted during the period at issue. He said that Brady regularly discards his phones due to privacy concerns.

“With all due respect,” Parker said, “Brady’s explanation made no sense whatsoever.”

NFL attorney Paul Clement, the former U.S. solicitor general, spoke first and immediately went to Article 46 of the NFL collective-bargaining agreement, which gives the commissioner the power to punish conduct detrimental to the league.

Judge Robert Katzmann asked about Brady destroying his phone, which did not become known until the arbitration hearing, and whether that had influenced his punishment on the ball-tampering charges.

Clement explained that Goodell found Brady’s actions to be conduct detrimental to the league. Although it did not result in additional punishment, it was one reason the commissioner decided to uphold the four-game suspension in the arbitration process.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dashoe said:

 

Even the federal judge called BS on Brady's excuse for destroying his phone and made the point he could have been suspended for that act alone 🤣

 

 

While Kessler attempted to argue that Goodell’s ruling was fundamentally unfair and violated the league’s collective-bargaining agreement, the judges were focused on the fact that Brady destroyed his cellphone.

“Why couldn’t the commissioner suspend Brady for that conduct alone?” Judge Barrington Parker asked. “You have one of the most celebrated players performing in that fashion? Anybody within 100 yards of this proceeding knew that would raise the stakes.”

Kessler replied that Wells never asked Brady for his cellphone, and that Brady had provided investigators with his emails and the numbers that he had texted during the period at issue. He said that Brady regularly discards his phones due to privacy concerns.

“With all due respect,” Parker said, “Brady’s explanation made no sense whatsoever.”

NFL attorney Paul Clement, the former U.S. solicitor general, spoke first and immediately went to Article 46 of the NFL collective-bargaining agreement, which gives the commissioner the power to punish conduct detrimental to the league.

Judge Robert Katzmann asked about Brady destroying his phone, which did not become known until the arbitration hearing, and whether that had influenced his punishment on the ball-tampering charges.

Clement explained that Goodell found Brady’s actions to be conduct detrimental to the league. Although it did not result in additional punishment, it was one reason the commissioner decided to uphold the four-game suspension in the arbitration process.

 

Exactly. Brady wasn't suspended for cheating. Because he didn't. Just destroying his phone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dmb3684 said:

 

Exactly. Brady wasn't suspended for cheating. Because he didn't. Just destroying his phone.

 

Nope even the judge made a comment about the evidence which basically was sufficient for Goddels ruling. I'm not sure why you fans keep defending something that was decided in by the NFL and the Federal Appeals court. Do people honestly think Goddell who has to answer to 32 DIFFERENT owners, truly wanted to go after Brady and the Patriots for laughs or there was some conspiracy? To the NFL  office this was a serious issue that had to be dealt with for the best interests of the league.

 

“Evidence of ball tampering is compelling, if not overwhelming,” Judge Denny Chin at one point told Brady’s attorney, Jeffrey Kessler.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...