Author Topic: 30 years from now Patriots Hall of Fame will be better than actual hall of fame.  (Read 7793 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline notthebowler

  • Aron Baynes
  • Posts: 138
  • Tommy Points: 26
If I was a betting man, I'd wager that 30 years from now Patriots fans will look back on this generation much the same way Clevelanders look back at Jim Brown and his all-time greatness. Mourning 20 straight years of no playoff appearances and 47 different Pats' starting quarterbacks during that time.

You will recall fondly the era before the team relocated to Shreveport, LA and was renamed the Ducks. Then about 5 years after the relocation, Foxboro was given a new team which reclaimed the Patriots moniker. But things were never the same...the Patriots are the laughingstock of the league and every year college football fans sincerely ask "Could this year's SEC champions beat the Patriots?  I think they probably could."   ;)

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
John Stallworth and Lynn Swann? Wow. Just wow. So let me explain how that would go. Ty Law would hit Swan in the mouth and Rodney would knock pretty boy Stallworth into next Wednesday and if they go across the middle one of the many Pats LBs will end them.

  I don't think you're old enough to realize what the Steelers defense would do to the Pats. If you're talking about Ty Law hitting someone in the mouth, consider the other side of the field. Brady's not very effective in games where he gets hit a lot, those guys would have him running from shadows by halftime.

  And, full disclosure, the Steelers are near the top of my "most hated franchises" list.
Overrated team that played in an era of what....25 teams or something? No salary cap? Going up against an OL of all pro bowlers and Ben Coates and Gronk and Brady and that team would have no idea what hit them. That defense never faced a player anything like Gronk, let alone the GOAT

   I don't think there's any real takeaway from this thread beyond your liking the Patriots and don't know much about the history of the league. And, as an fyi, the "fewer teams and no salary cap" means that a) the talent was concentrated in the fewer teams and b) there wasn't the parity that comes with a salary cap.
So what that means is that there were the same number of Pro Bowlers but that Brady did more winning with guys like David Patten and Givens, against teams loaded with Pro Bowlers, like the Colts, than the Steelers ever did.

Give Brady a team full of Pro Bowlers like the Cowboys and Niners and whatnot and how many rings does Brady win? 13?


Hey I think I see a call coming into a phone booth over there. It's for you. It's the past.

Hey could you do me a favor and tell us all stories about how great Jim Taylor was when the league had virtually no black guys and had half as many teams and played like 10 games a year.

Or maybe we could hear about how great the league was back when Joe Namath made a Hall of Fame career on 50% passing and would have a cigarette and coffee for breakfast.

Maybe we could discuss how incredible the Steel Curtain was before the zone blitz was even invented.

Perhaps we could get into how today's Patriots would play in coverage back when the horse collar was legal and when you could play defense on a guy without being called for breathing on him.

We could discuss how incredibly good and athletic the league was back in the days of no black quarterbacks.

Please. Please tell me about the glorious history of the league before Tom Brady showed up and broke every record. It should be very interesting.

  I doubt if you'd know whether it was interesting or not. I don't know what you're doing beyond throwing out some random phrases and pretending they mean something. The Steelers defensive players weren't that great because teams didn't play the zone blitz back then? That's just foolish, as is the ridiculous claim that the Pats defense would be much better in coverage if they played when horse collar tackles were legal. Seriously?

Offline eja117

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18273
  • Tommy Points: 1173
John Stallworth and Lynn Swann? Wow. Just wow. So let me explain how that would go. Ty Law would hit Swan in the mouth and Rodney would knock pretty boy Stallworth into next Wednesday and if they go across the middle one of the many Pats LBs will end them.

  I don't think you're old enough to realize what the Steelers defense would do to the Pats. If you're talking about Ty Law hitting someone in the mouth, consider the other side of the field. Brady's not very effective in games where he gets hit a lot, those guys would have him running from shadows by halftime.

  And, full disclosure, the Steelers are near the top of my "most hated franchises" list.
Overrated team that played in an era of what....25 teams or something? No salary cap? Going up against an OL of all pro bowlers and Ben Coates and Gronk and Brady and that team would have no idea what hit them. That defense never faced a player anything like Gronk, let alone the GOAT

   I don't think there's any real takeaway from this thread beyond your liking the Patriots and don't know much about the history of the league. And, as an fyi, the "fewer teams and no salary cap" means that a) the talent was concentrated in the fewer teams and b) there wasn't the parity that comes with a salary cap.
So what that means is that there were the same number of Pro Bowlers but that Brady did more winning with guys like David Patten and Givens, against teams loaded with Pro Bowlers, like the Colts, than the Steelers ever did.

Give Brady a team full of Pro Bowlers like the Cowboys and Niners and whatnot and how many rings does Brady win? 13?


Hey I think I see a call coming into a phone booth over there. It's for you. It's the past.

Hey could you do me a favor and tell us all stories about how great Jim Taylor was when the league had virtually no black guys and had half as many teams and played like 10 games a year.

Or maybe we could hear about how great the league was back when Joe Namath made a Hall of Fame career on 50% passing and would have a cigarette and coffee for breakfast.

Maybe we could discuss how incredible the Steel Curtain was before the zone blitz was even invented.

Perhaps we could get into how today's Patriots would play in coverage back when the horse collar was legal and when you could play defense on a guy without being called for breathing on him.

We could discuss how incredibly good and athletic the league was back in the days of no black quarterbacks.

Please. Please tell me about the glorious history of the league before Tom Brady showed up and broke every record. It should be very interesting.

  I doubt if you'd know whether it was interesting or not. I don't know what you're doing beyond throwing out some random phrases and pretending they mean something. The Steelers defensive players weren't that great because teams didn't play the zone blitz back then? That's just foolish, as is the ridiculous claim that the Pats defense would be much better in coverage if they played when horse collar tackles were legal. Seriously?
My point is the Patriots dynasty is a more accomplished dynasty with better players in a more competitive era.  Kinda like how Seal Team Six would ruin the Roman Legionnaires

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1740
  • Tommy Points: 213
How close is this to the truth: The all-time single-season Pats have the GOAT quarterback, two top 25 running backs, the 2nd GOAT wide receiver, the GOAT slot receiver, another top 50 wide receiver, the GOAT tight end, another top 25 tight end, a top 5-10 offensive line as a whole, a top 25 defensive lineman, a top 5 nose tackle, a top 10 middle linebacker, a top 10 outside linebacker, a top 10 cornerback, another top 10 cornerback, another top 25 cornerback, a top 10 strong safety, a top 5 kicker, the GOAT coach. What franchises can match or exceed that?
« Last Edit: January 19, 2016, 11:57:12 AM by Dino Pitino »
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline eja117

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18273
  • Tommy Points: 1173
Shhhhh.....Dino....when you say stuff like that they assume you don't know a lot about the history of pro football. They call it "trolling." It makes them annoyed.

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1740
  • Tommy Points: 213
Shhhhh.....Dino....when you say stuff like that they assume you don't know a lot about the history of pro football. They call it "trolling." It makes them annoyed.

Seems to make them quiet more than annoyed, lol.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Shhhhh.....Dino....when you say stuff like that they assume you don't know a lot about the history of pro football. They call it "trolling." It makes them annoyed.

  Or they'll make the rather obvious claim that you don't seem to be at all able to grasp simple concepts, such as the fact that a team with two players who are arguably the best at their position and a handful of others that might be arguably top 5-top 10 at their position wouldn't be able to compete with a team comprised of the top players at 20 or so of the 22 positions and players, which was your original premise.

  Or maybe they'll remember your past claims arguing that the quarterback of whichever team won the league was automatically the best quarterback in the league that year, so by your standards your "GOAT" was only the best at his position once in the last 10 years. Not so impressive. I also doubt anyone could make a really convincing argument that you couldn't put another all-time great qb and put them on the Pats and have similar success.
 

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12195
  • Tommy Points: 2400
All I'm going to say is - how long before Eja wants to TRADE Brady AGAIN ;D

I'd venture a guess that it will be right after the NE-DEN game.
Marcus Smart "Impacts Winning." Boston Celtics Coach Brad Stevens

Offline eja117

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18273
  • Tommy Points: 1173
All I'm going to say is - how long before Eja wants to TRADE Brady AGAIN ;D

I'd venture a guess that it will be right after the NE-DEN game.
If Brady gets crushed in Denver? Yeah, I'd be interested in what we could get for a 38 year old QB. Why wouldn't I?

Offline eja117

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18273
  • Tommy Points: 1173
Shhhhh.....Dino....when you say stuff like that they assume you don't know a lot about the history of pro football. They call it "trolling." It makes them annoyed.

  Or they'll make the rather obvious claim that you don't seem to be at all able to grasp simple concepts, such as the fact that a team with two players who are arguably the best at their position and a handful of others that might be arguably top 5-top 10 at their position wouldn't be able to compete with a team comprised of the top players at 20 or so of the 22 positions and players, which was your original premise.

  Or maybe they'll remember your past claims arguing that the quarterback of whichever team won the league was automatically the best quarterback in the league that year, so by your standards your "GOAT" was only the best at his position once in the last 10 years. Not so impressive. I also doubt anyone could make a really convincing argument that you couldn't put another all-time great qb and put them on the Pats and have similar success.
 
I don't think I said that and would need that shown to me.

I think you also have to remember my general claims that I don't believe that some of these supposed best players of all time at their position are actually better than players that have played for the Pats.

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12195
  • Tommy Points: 2400
All I'm going to say is - how long before Eja wants to TRADE Brady AGAIN ;D

I'd venture a guess that it will be right after the NE-DEN game.
If Brady gets crushed in Denver? Yeah, I'd be interested in what we could get for a 38 year old QB. Why wouldn't I?

WHAT?

You're actually leaving the possibility out there of a NE beatdown in DEN?

So, you'd trade (in YOUR own mind) the ringleader of YOUR Pats HOF.

The Shame.
Marcus Smart "Impacts Winning." Boston Celtics Coach Brad Stevens

Offline eja117

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18273
  • Tommy Points: 1173
All I'm going to say is - how long before Eja wants to TRADE Brady AGAIN ;D

I'd venture a guess that it will be right after the NE-DEN game.
If Brady gets crushed in Denver? Yeah, I'd be interested in what we could get for a 38 year old QB. Why wouldn't I?

WHAT?

You're actually leaving the possibility out there of a NE beatdown in DEN?

So, you'd trade (in YOUR own mind) the ringleader of YOUR Pats HOF.

The Shame.
Brady himself has actually spoken on this and states there will be a day that Bill will call him into the office and tell him to bring his playbook.  (Which I find an interesting statement. It seems to imply he just plans to never retire.)

Danny Ainge has made similar statements that it's better to trade a star too early, than too late, and he did it with Pierce and KG.

It would seem unlikely to try to trade Brady if he's still in Super Bowl possibility mode, and I think he will be for a solid two or three more years, but it's hard to say. If you get a Godfather offer you have to listen to it, although realistically, unless it's to a California team I would imagine Tom would just retire. I doubt he'd go play for Tampa Bay or Buffalo or something

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1740
  • Tommy Points: 213
Shhhhh.....Dino....when you say stuff like that they assume you don't know a lot about the history of pro football. They call it "trolling." It makes them annoyed.

  Or they'll make the rather obvious claim that you don't seem to be at all able to grasp simple concepts, such as the fact that a team with two players who are arguably the best at their position and a handful of others that might be arguably top 5-top 10 at their position wouldn't be able to compete with a team comprised of the top players at 20 or so of the 22 positions and players, which was your original premise.

I assumed he was speaking hyperbolically. If it was a serious premise, then, uh, well, yeah, that's absurd. Let's just say it was just an enthusiastic way to express his feeling that the Pats have a better all-time roster than all other franchises: Do they? Not if only players with longish careers as a Patriot qualify, no. But which franchises can put together a better all-time single-season team?
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1740
  • Tommy Points: 213
Don't be shy, football connoisseurs, lol.
Whose all-time single-season team is better?
Giants? Dolphins? 49ers? Steelers?
Cowboys? Packers? Colts? Raiders?

Some franchises will have better defenses, and maybe some teams will have offenses as good, but I doubt any team would be better overall.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Don't be shy, football connoisseurs, lol.
Whose all-time single-season team is better?
Giants? Dolphins? 49ers? Steelers?
Cowboys? Packers? Colts? Raiders?

Some franchises will have better defenses, and maybe some teams will have offenses as good, but I doubt any team would be better overall.

  You're talking about including players who were only on a team for a year or two? I'll try the Raiders. The "weak spots" are on offense are qb (two of whom were league MVPs) and tight end (Dave Casper, Ray Chester and Todd Christensen). The offensive line's top notch. The best running backs (Marcus Allen, Eric Dickerson and Bo Jackson) are all-time greats, with Van Eeghan and Reese at fullback. The wide receivers would include (off the top of my head) Jerry Rice, Randy Moss, Tim Brown and Fred Belitnikoff.

  Defensive backs include Charles and Rod Woodson, Ronny Lott, Willie Brown, Lester Hayes and Mike Haynes, Eric Allen and Terry McDaniel. Defensive linemen include Howie Long, Warren Sapp, Seymour, McGlockton, Matuzak, Alzado, Maryland and Laroi Glover. Linebackers would include Ted Hendricks, Rod Martin, Matt Millen and Hacksaw Reynolds. Don't forget two of the best punters in league history, Guy and Lechler. Undoubtedly I missed a few players, especially the 1-2 year types, but a pretty solid team all around.

  Edit: Gotta throw in Kahlil Mack, a second year player who's the first player ever to make all pro at two positions (LB and DE) in the same season.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2016, 08:44:03 PM by BballTim »