I agree with HT 5-4 or 6-3.

He hasn't won one since they went away from their bread and butter. A ton of above average solid role players around the best coach and QB in the game. They brought in a couple big names (i.e. Moss, Thomas, etc.), and weren't able to get it done.

 

Now they're back to the type of team that won those 3 titles, and playing at an extremely high level. Coincidence? I think not.

 

He hasn't won since they got caught cheating & stealing plays. Plain & simple.

He hasn't won since they got caught cheating & stealing plays. Plain & simple.

 

Yeah, that David Tyree miracle, was a result of them not stealing plays...

 

You're right, they're no good and never have been, and they're not the best team in the NFL this season...Oh, wait....

Yeah, that David Tyree miracle, was a result of them not stealing plays...

 

You're right, they're no good and never have been, and they're not the best team in the NFL this season...Oh, wait....

 

Don't go overboard. The Pats are a good team, but at this point in the season, they're not a clear cut favorite to win the Super Bowl.

 

I simply said that the Patriots, Belichek & Brady haven't won since they got caught cheating. Is that incorrect? I feel confident that the two are directly related.

 

That's not to say that the Pats won't win one without cheating...

Don't go overboard. The Pats are a good team, but at this point in the season, they're not a clear cut favorite to win the Super Bowl.

 

I simply said that the Patriots, Belichek & Brady haven't won since they got caught cheating. Is that incorrect? I feel confident that the two are directly related.

 

That's not to say that the Pats won't win one without cheating...

 

They also haven't won one since they changed their basic strategy. I think the shift in personnel and strategy has had much much more to do with it then the whole overblown spygate fiasco.

 

I'd say the Pats are one of maybe 3-4 teams with a realistic chance at winning it this year, so yeah, I'd say that makes them a favorite.

I have to ask. For all those saying they think the Bengals would have a better record with Brady, is that not directly putting the blame for those losses on Carson Palmer? 3 or 4 of the losses would be wins solely because Brady was behind center and not Palmer? I'm just trying to understand this thread and it's substance

I have to ask. For all those saying they think the Bengals would have a better record with Brady, is that not directly putting the blame for those losses on Carson Palmer? 3 or 4 of the losses would be wins solely because Brady was behind center and not Palmer? I'm just trying to understand this thread and it's substance

 

Good question. The only game that Brady would not have lost that Palmer did was the Tampa Bay game, in my opinion...

Good question. The only game that Brady would not have lost that Palmer did was the Tampa Bay game, in my opinion...

 

C'mon. Palmer gave Indy 7 points last game and he's consistently turned the ball over. Besides that, Brady is 10 times the quarterback Palmer is. He's smarter, more mobile, more accurate, stronger armed, a better leader, and light-years better in close games. We have a winning record with Brady, IMO.

C'mon. Palmer gave Indy 7 points last game and he's consistently turned the ball over. Besides that, Brady is 10 times the quarterback Palmer is. He's smarter, more mobile, more accurate, stronger armed, a better leader, and light-years better in close games. We have a winning record with Brady, IMO.

 

I'm saying that Palmer gets most of the blame for the TB loss. He threw a bad pass on an out that led directly to 6 points, then he threw a pick late in the game when he should have just audibled to a run.

 

I should have clarified that in my earlier post. Without a doubt, Brady would have won the TB game. I'm not sure that you can point to any other games & say that (granted, I refused to watch Indy game.)

Yeah, that David Tyree miracle, was a result of them not stealing plays...

 

You're right, they're no good and never have been, and they're not the best team in the NFL this season...Oh, wait....

 

That's taking an awful big leap there based on just one game. If the Pats are the best in the NFL, what does that say about the Brown Spots, who pounded NE into a brown spot?

 

There is no clear-cut best team in the NFL this season. Who looks fantastic this week can look like a chump the next.

C'mon. Palmer gave Indy 7 points last game and he's consistently turned the ball over. Besides that, Brady is 10 times the quarterback Palmer is. He's smarter, more mobile, more accurate, stronger armed, a better leader, and light-years better in close games. We have a winning record with Brady, IMO.

 

Why didn't Brady beat Cleveland in Cleveland with his own team then?

Same or maybe a little better.

 

 

He is a product of a great team and the best coach/front office in the NFL..........

Same or maybe a little better.

 

 

He is a product of a great team and the best coach/front office in the NFL..........

 

I'll grant you coach (but it's close), but most certainly will argue about front office.

Why didn't Brady beat Cleveland in Cleveland with his own team then?

 

One game? New England has looked pretty good this year. Cleveland looks much better than Cincy to me this year, no matter what the record says. They don't have the same amount of talent as the Bengals, but they still look like they have a better team.

Why didn't Brady beat Cleveland in Cleveland with his own team then?

 

He just tore up the Steelers; slaughtered them I should say. That's proof enough that Brady is ridiculously talented. Not to mention he's throwing to Deion Branch, Brandon Tate, and Wes Welker. He just threw 3 touchdown passes to Rob Gronkowski for God's sake. Not to mention his best RB he's had was Cory Dillon. I understand that their O-line is very solid, better than the Bengals, but if anyone wants to sit here and say that he wouldn't make much of a difference on the Bengal's team then they're definitely not watching the Patriots every week.