Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Greatest Pats Team?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Best team?
1985
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
1996
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
2001
3%
 3%  [ 1 ]
2003
6%
 6%  [ 2 ]
2004
46%
 46%  [ 15 ]
2007
43%
 43%  [ 14 ]
Total Votes : 32

Author Message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
I don't think it's that crazy. The Steelers D that year was absolutely dominant.

The 2007 Patriots after about week 8 or 9 of the season were not an all time great team. They put up ridiculous numbers blowing out some pretty bad teams in the first half of the season. The last 10 games or so there were your run of the mill good playoff team. Even had they won that Super Bowl, I'm not sure I would have considered them the overall best team. Just the one which finished with the overall best record.

Here's the thing though, if you're saying "the 2007 Patriots were so great because they were 18-1 and 1 play away from a perfect record" then clearly you are basing their "greatness" on their record and wins and losses. In that case, I'd say a team that goes 17-2 and actually wins the Super Bowl is every bit as good or more impressive, especially when you factor in strength of opponents and such.

For all the talk of how dominant the 2007 offense was, here's a stat for you. Over the final 11 games (week 9 through the Super Bowl), the offense averaged 371 yards per game. Only 4 times did they top 400 yards (and once had 400 exactly). That's not even close to a dominant offense and we've seen better in New England over the last couple of years. People on this board were crying disaster when this year's Patriots "only" put up 431 ugly yards against Buffalo week 1. What's 371 yards look like? Well the 2010 Patriots that got "shut down" by the Jets in the playoffs? They had 372 yards offense in that game. That's how not dominant the 2007 Patriots were after midseason in 2007.

Forget the epic choke at the end of the year, that team is one of the most overrrated teams of all time in terms of the way they are remembered. If they lose 1 regular season game (say the Baltimore game that Bart Scott lost for the Ravens) and it's just another excellent but not particularly memorable team. Yes, the 16-0 season was a great achievement and I'm not trying to diminish the team's results in terms of wins/losses. But in terms of on-field performance, that team was probably not in the top 15 all time teams. There were a number of regular season games that were within 1 or 2 plays of swinging the other way. Just like a lot of 14-2 or 15-1 teams over the course of history. 16-0 is special but it is also flukey and requires luck more than anything. Just like they were 1 fluke play from being 19-0, they were one more fluke play away from being 17-2 (etc).

In other words, I think there are a lot of teams that went 17-2, 17-1, 16-2 etc who were every bit as good or better than the 2007 Patriots. Whether or not it was the weight of the undefeated streak or the 2nd half Patriots being much closer to that team's true ability level, I'm not sure. But 8 great games against some bad teams isn't historic nor is it the sign IMO of a truly great "team".

Back to the 2004 Steelers - that defense allowed more than 300 yards just 5 times (including the loss to the Patriots in the AFCCG). That defense was better than the 2007 Pats offense.


I have felt for years the offense became to Moss and Welker focused in the second half of the season.

The pinnacle of that season, and probably the most dominant game I have ever seen myself, was the 48-27 blow out in Dallas against the 5-0 Cowboys, who were an excellent team in 2007.

I think NE's game plan and offensive philosophy evolved negatively over the course of the season, something was obvious in the rematch with San Diego compared to how the week 2 game had gone. But it isn't just records or gaudy statistics.

The Patriots of 2007 were too good to lose. Even in error filled games, the sheer level of talent EVERYWHERE from players to coaches was so overwhelming it took multiple fluke plays at the last second of the game playing against a red hot team for them to finally lose (even then Moss burned the prevent hail mary defense). I completely agree the 2007 Pats peaked way too early, but there is no way they lose to the 2004 Pats with the 17th ranked passing defense.

As far as the yardage per game number you mention, I'd curious to see how the 07 # compares to the rest of the 07 teams vs. the future Pats teams and their respective seasons.

Brady obvious throws for more yardage now than he did 2001-2006, but the entire league is that way. To even insinuate that the Patriots of recent years have done the passing game better than the 2007 Pats did is ludicrous. The 2007 Pats were so efficient it was scary. Again -



THAT is one of the most unbelievable things I have ever seen. That is so much more beyond playing bad defenses, that overwhelming dominance.
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
do you really think, that if the '04 Pats played the '07 Pats, the '07 Pats would win?


Is this a joke?

2004 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.3 PPG
2007 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.5 PPG

2004 Patriots offense: 4th in league, 27 ppg
2007 Patriots offense: greatest ever, 37 ppg



Frankly, I think it would be a great game & would be silly to think the 2007 team would easily win, but it is nothing other than sheer lunacy to think the 2004 team would be favored to win.

The 2004 defense would be unlikely to confuse Brady into becoming a turnover machine, and big receivers killed the Patriots that season. Eric Moulds, Lee Evans, Marty Booker, Koren Robinson, Torry Holt, Eddie Kinnison, Antonio Bryant, Chad Johnson, TK Houshmanzadeh, Hines Ward, and even T.O. with one leg all had big to huge games against them that year.

The 2004 Patriots defense ranked 17th in the league against the pass. Something tells me Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and everyone else would have given them major problems.


If they played each other in the Super Bowl, the 2004 Patriots would be favored to win. The 2007 Patriots offense put up 347 yards (and under 200 passing) against the Chargers D who was definitely worse than the 2004 Patriots.

The 2004 Patriots didn't have Randy Moss, so of course they suck relative to 2007, right? Look objectively at the way those 2 teams played down the stretch and the characteristics of those teams and think about why some of those more mediocre WR's succeeded against the 2004 Patriots and I think you'll understand why it's nothing close to "lunacy" to suggest the 2004 team would be (and should be) favored.

Now, if those 2 teams played in week 2 of either of their respective seasons? 2007 wins big probably. But later on in the season? 2004 probably wins. The 2004 Colts, whom the Pats shut down in the playoffs, were a better offense relative to their era than the 2007 Patriots (and were playing at a higher level in November or December than the 2007 Patriots were regardless of era). So your entire "the 2004 team couldn't stop XYZ receiver so they wouldn't be able to stop 2007" schtick goes right out the window.

The 2004 Colts averaged 398 yards per game in their final 11 games (and unlike the Patriots, that Colts team pulled their QB in week 17, so those numbers include a putrid 200 yard offensive performance from Jim Sorgi). Given their era, that makes them a much more dangerous team offensively down the stretch of that season than the 2007 Patriots were. So if we're discussing a Super Bowl matchup, it's totally appropriate - and correct - to suggest the 2004 Patriots were plenty equipped to shut down that type of team.

I know Moss was on that team and he had a record setting year and you watch those highlights every day, but that doesn't actually mean that team was as good as you remember. There have been plenty of great offenses on par with the 2007 Patriots and the 2004 Patriots shut one of them down in the playoffs.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:


As far as the yardage per game number you mention, I'd curious to see how the 07 # compares to the rest of the 07 teams vs. the future Pats teams and their respective seasons.


2007 Patriots:

6580 yards offense
5203.5 league average

1376.50 more than average (86 yards per game more than average)

2012 Patriots

6846 yards offense
5555.2 league average

1290.8 more than average (81 yards per game more than average)

2011 Patriots

6848 yards offense
5549.3 league average

1298.7 more than average (81 yards per game more than average)


Non-Patriots:

2011 Saints

7474 yards offense
5549.3 league average

1924.70 more than average (120 yards per game more than average)

2004 Chiefs

6695 yards offense
5234.60 league average

1460.4 more than league average (91 yards per game more than average)

2004 Colts

6475 yards offense
5234.60 league average
1240.4 more than league average (78 yards per game more than average)


2008 Saints

6571 yards offense
5235.8 league average
1335.2 more than league average (84 yards per game more than average)


The 2007 Patriots were not especially more dominant than plenty of other great offenses over the past 10 years (and worse than the 2004 Chiefs who nobody outside of Chiefs fans really remembers as a great offense). Especially when you factor in the degree to which their early season success skewed their results. Every offense has bad games, but the 2007 team was like an entirely different (and nowhere near as dominant) offense for the final 11 games of their 2007 campaign.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dalton


Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 2908
Location: Illinois
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
do you really think, that if the '04 Pats played the '07 Pats, the '07 Pats would win?


Is this a joke?

2004 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.3 PPG
2007 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.5 PPG

2004 Patriots offense: 4th in league, 27 ppg
2007 Patriots offense: greatest ever, 37 ppg



Frankly, I think it would be a great game & would be silly to think the 2007 team would easily win, but it is nothing other than sheer lunacy to think the 2004 team would be favored to win.

The 2004 defense would be unlikely to confuse Brady into becoming a turnover machine, and big receivers killed the Patriots that season. Eric Moulds, Lee Evans, Marty Booker, Koren Robinson, Torry Holt, Eddie Kinnison, Antonio Bryant, Chad Johnson, TK Houshmanzadeh, Hines Ward, and even T.O. with one leg all had big to huge games against them that year.

The 2004 Patriots defense ranked 17th in the league against the pass. Something tells me Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and everyone else would have given them major problems.


If they played each other in the Super Bowl, the 2004 Patriots would be favored to win. The 2007 Patriots offense put up 347 yards (and under 200 passing) against the Chargers D who was definitely worse than the 2004 Patriots.

The 2004 Patriots didn't have Randy Moss, so of course they suck relative to 2007, right? Look objectively at the way those 2 teams played down the stretch and the characteristics of those teams and think about why some of those more mediocre WR's succeeded against the 2004 Patriots and I think you'll understand why it's nothing close to "lunacy" to suggest the 2004 team would be (and should be) favored.

Now, if those 2 teams played in week 2 of either of their respective seasons? 2007 wins big probably. But later on in the season? 2004 probably wins. The 2004 Colts, whom the Pats shut down in the playoffs, were a better offense relative to their era than the 2007 Patriots (and were playing at a higher level in November or December than the 2007 Patriots were regardless of era). So your entire "the 2004 team couldn't stop XYZ receiver so they wouldn't be able to stop 2007" schtick goes right out the window.

The 2004 Colts averaged 398 yards per game in their final 11 games (and unlike the Patriots, that Colts team pulled their QB in week 17, so those numbers include a putrid 200 yard offensive performance from Jim Sorgi). Given their era, that makes them a much more dangerous team offensively down the stretch of that season than the 2007 Patriots were. So if we're discussing a Super Bowl matchup, it's totally appropriate - and correct - to suggest the 2004 Patriots were plenty equipped to shut down that type of team.

I know Moss was on that team and he had a record setting year and you watch those highlights every day, but that doesn't actually mean that team was as good as you remember. There have been plenty of great offenses on par with the 2007 Patriots and the 2004 Patriots shut one of them down in the playoffs.


The 04' Pats played the 04' Colts in a snowstorm at Foxborough. The week 1 game with these two teams was much, much closer. Had Mike V. not missed the FG, Colts take them into OT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dalton wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
do you really think, that if the '04 Pats played the '07 Pats, the '07 Pats would win?


Is this a joke?

2004 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.3 PPG
2007 Patriots defense: 4th in league, 16.5 PPG

2004 Patriots offense: 4th in league, 27 ppg
2007 Patriots offense: greatest ever, 37 ppg



Frankly, I think it would be a great game & would be silly to think the 2007 team would easily win, but it is nothing other than sheer lunacy to think the 2004 team would be favored to win.

The 2004 defense would be unlikely to confuse Brady into becoming a turnover machine, and big receivers killed the Patriots that season. Eric Moulds, Lee Evans, Marty Booker, Koren Robinson, Torry Holt, Eddie Kinnison, Antonio Bryant, Chad Johnson, TK Houshmanzadeh, Hines Ward, and even T.O. with one leg all had big to huge games against them that year.

The 2004 Patriots defense ranked 17th in the league against the pass. Something tells me Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and everyone else would have given them major problems.


If they played each other in the Super Bowl, the 2004 Patriots would be favored to win. The 2007 Patriots offense put up 347 yards (and under 200 passing) against the Chargers D who was definitely worse than the 2004 Patriots.

The 2004 Patriots didn't have Randy Moss, so of course they suck relative to 2007, right? Look objectively at the way those 2 teams played down the stretch and the characteristics of those teams and think about why some of those more mediocre WR's succeeded against the 2004 Patriots and I think you'll understand why it's nothing close to "lunacy" to suggest the 2004 team would be (and should be) favored.

Now, if those 2 teams played in week 2 of either of their respective seasons? 2007 wins big probably. But later on in the season? 2004 probably wins. The 2004 Colts, whom the Pats shut down in the playoffs, were a better offense relative to their era than the 2007 Patriots (and were playing at a higher level in November or December than the 2007 Patriots were regardless of era). So your entire "the 2004 team couldn't stop XYZ receiver so they wouldn't be able to stop 2007" schtick goes right out the window.

The 2004 Colts averaged 398 yards per game in their final 11 games (and unlike the Patriots, that Colts team pulled their QB in week 17, so those numbers include a putrid 200 yard offensive performance from Jim Sorgi). Given their era, that makes them a much more dangerous team offensively down the stretch of that season than the 2007 Patriots were. So if we're discussing a Super Bowl matchup, it's totally appropriate - and correct - to suggest the 2004 Patriots were plenty equipped to shut down that type of team.

I know Moss was on that team and he had a record setting year and you watch those highlights every day, but that doesn't actually mean that team was as good as you remember. There have been plenty of great offenses on par with the 2007 Patriots and the 2004 Patriots shut one of them down in the playoffs.


The 04' Pats played the 04' Colts in a snowstorm at Foxborough. The week 1 game with these two teams was much, much closer. Had Mike V. not missed the FG, Colts take them into OT.


So you're disputing the idea that the 2004 Patriots shut down Peyton Manning's Colts in the playoffs?

The snow wasn't much of a factor in that game if you're old enough to remember (or have recently re-watched). The Patriots confused Manning badly and while a lot of people use the "outdoor Manning" excuse, that defense executed at an extremely high level that day and was far more responsible for the Colts' offenses failures than the weather.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The obvious rebuttal to that is would the defense effectively confuse Tom Brady the same way they did Peyton Manning?

I would say no, on top of the fact that NE had superior wide receiver talent.
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Now, if those 2 teams played in week 2 of either of their respective seasons? 2007 wins big probably. But later on in the season? 2004 probably wins.


I think this is the most agreeable answer. First half of season = 07 big, 2nd half, I would say close game which could go either way.

It isn't just Randy Moss's presence, either. Though he is obviously an enormous upgrade from Deion Branch.
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
The obvious rebuttal to that is would the defense effectively confuse Tom Brady the same way they did Peyton Manning?

I would say no, on top of the fact that NE had superior wide receiver talent.


The 2004 Colts had better offensive personnel. No, they didn't have anyone as dominant as 2007 Randy Moss but their skill positions were well stocked

RB - 2004 Colts had in-his-prime Edgerrin James and Dominic Rhodes who were vastly better than the 2007 Pats RB's

Receivers/TE's:

Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Donte Stallworth
Jabar Gaffney
Ben Watson

vs.

Marvin Harrison
Reggie Wayne
Brandon Stokley
Dallas Clark
Marcus Pollard

That's pretty darn close. Stokley was definitely better than the Pats #3 and #4 WR's and Wayne/Harrison weren't too far below Welker/Moss.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Moss advantage is beyond insurmountable, imo.
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
The Moss advantage is beyond insurmountable, imo.


Of course you'd say that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheNutGronker


Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Posts: 1539
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
The Moss advantage is beyond insurmountable, imo.


Of course you'd say that.

It was probably the greatest season by a WR ever so it's not outlandish to say so
_________________

2013 Adopt-a-Patriot: Rob "Is Wayne Brady Gonna Have To" Ninkovich
Tackles: 14 Sacks: 0 TFL: 2 FR: 1 FF: 1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheNutGronker wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
The Moss advantage is beyond insurmountable, imo.


Of course you'd say that.

It was probably the greatest season by a WR ever so it's not outlandish to say so


Greatest season ever by a WR? It was 36th all time in yards, 57th all time in yards per catch (of receivers with 60+ receptions), 48th all time in yards per game and 40th all time in total receptions.

It was the greatest in terms of TD's and he had a ridiculously good season, but calling it the greatest season by a WR ever is a massive stretch.

I'd also say that 7 catches for 94 yards in 3 playoff games hurts any claim he has to best season by a WR. Yes, teams were doubling him, but if he were as insurmountable as NBT suggests, if he was as dominant as NBT suggests, he'd have better numbers than that.

His first 4 games of that season were perhaps the best 4 consecutive games by a WR ever. After those 4 games, Moss averaged 5.5 catches per game and 82 yards per game. Good certainly but not historically so.

He's one of the best ever to play the game, and I know his impact transcends his stats but people remember 2007 Moss as a guy who was dominating every game and catching bombs every game. That's just not the case. He wasn't on some crazy level beyond what other elite WR's have done.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
He's one of the best ever to play the game, and I know his impact transcends his stats but people remember 2007 Moss as a guy who was dominating every game and catching bombs every game. That's just not the case. He wasn't on some crazy level beyond what other elite WR's have done.


Anyone who understands the receiver position knows how unreal Moss's 2007 season was.

Rice's 22 touchdown catch record was thought to be one of the most untouchable offensive records in existence. The closest anybody else had EVER come to 22 was 17 (Rice once, Moss twice, Mushin Muhhamdad once, and someone else I cannot recall). It is extremely difficult for receivers to get beyond that 15 to 17 area because they start seeing such crazy coverage. Lets take Calvin Johnson in 2011.

Calvin scored 2 touchdowns in each of the first 4 games, even more than Moss scored in 2007. However, after catching 8 touchdowns in weeks 1-4, Calvin would only catch another 8 from weeks 5 - 17. Defenses adjusted. Coverages adjusted. The defenses forced other players to beat them.

What is so scary about Moss's 2007 season is he experienced the exact same types of adjustments, and it showed in his yardage numbers. But his touchdown numbers remained on pace. The word "unstoppable" is way overused in football, but it certainly does accurately describe Randy Moss's 2007 season. Before you rush to say he didn't do much in the coverage, that of course doesn't tell the tale. Moss got behind the Giants several times in the SB, only on plays Brady was sacked or fumbled. He was a decoy in Divisional round, allowing TB to 26-28. Brady played like crap in the AFCCG.

To think that all time single season TD marks for receivers looks like this

-Randy Moss - 23 - 2007
-Jerry Rice - 22 - 1985
-Mushin Muhammad - 17 - 2004
-Randy Moss - 17 - 2003
-Randy Moss - 17 - 1998
-Jerry Rice - 16 - 1990s
-everyone else 16 or below

is pretty amazing. It's EXTREMELY difficult to do, but Moss just kept rolling. Weren't flukes, either. Already 17 touchdowns when he dropped 2 on Pitt, 19 then another 2 Miami, 21, and then 2 more on NYG, for 23.

That said, 2007 isn't even Moss's best season. Randy in 2003 was the best a receiver has ever played in my mind, followed pretty closely by 1998. Moss in 1998 was probably more dangerous, but he had that aura & deafening buzz/hype surrounding him while the league yet to 'adjust' to the extent that it would to stop him. So while 2007 Moss is one of the greatest individual seasons ever, it isn't even his own personal best. Moss of 2003, with 2007s Tom Brady? Or 1998 Moss?

That would have been a sight. Watching entire games of the 1998 Vikings is pretty awesome. Moss is so unbelievably fast, he makes every corner look short, he has unreal hops and just catches everything.

The Randy of 1998 would have scored 30+ times on the 2007 Patriots. For as good he was, Moss in 2007 was a shell of his former self athletically. Large, obvious drop in agility and significant decline in top end speed. Still freakishly athletic, but the drop 4.15 to 4.30 ish he had in 07 is a big one.



Just look at that route... Shocked Very Happy
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25256
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
Randy in 2003 was the best a receiver has ever played in my mind,


I'd probably agree with this. If Moss's 2003 wasn't the best ever from a WR, it's definitely a top 3.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22782
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
Randy in 2003 was the best a receiver has ever played in my mind,


I'd probably agree with this. If Moss's 2003 wasn't the best ever from a WR, it's definitely a top 3.


2003 was probably the best combo of his athleticism/intelligence skills. He was probably - physically - 95% of the player he was 1998-2000, but on the field, he knew pretty much exactly what he was doing.

It is either 03 or 98. 1998, 190 yards and 2 tds against GB (75 yarder called back for holding on dif. drive); few weeks later, 9 for 150 and 1 TD vs. GB again. Following week, 3catches, 163 yards and 3 TDs @ Dallas. Next week, Cris Carter out, "all the focus will be on Moss" - another 100 yards and 3 touchdowns. Scores in every game remaining that season. NFC Championship game 34 yard td 5 plays into the drive.

"We knew we had the Super Bowl won as soon as the Vikings lost cuz we didnt have to play randy moss.. It was as simple as that.. We were terrified of that dude". Trevor pryce Denver broncos

Very Happy
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group