NFL Thread

[Alsacs]

My friend, we can hit each here all day and confuse all the mouth breathers, but let's not get crazy.

We both know what's going on here.

1. BB is not coaching the Pats in 2018
2. Neither are both coordinators
3. The pats will still win it all this year

I'm invoking my Board Rule #2...Where there's Smoke, there's fire...official or not, bill will have an office in East Rutherford next year.

Coughlin is the perfect replacement.
He still wants to coach.
He would have a veteran team with a good QB.
Wouldn’t be intimidated replacing BB.
He has connections to the area.
You think I am joking.
Coughlin would be on the short list.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Coughlin is the perfect replacement.
He still wants to coach.
He would have a veteran team with a good QB.
Wouldn’t be intimidated replacing BB.
He has connections to the area.
You think I am joking.
Coughlin would be on the short list.

Line 2 is wrong.

He's done.

I'll give you the rest.

 

[Alsacs]

Line 2 is wrong.

He's done.

I'll give you the rest.

Tom Coughlin tells MMQB that he wants to coach again

 

[KaiserUEO]

Tom Coughlin tells MMQB that he wants to coach again

2 years ago.

Team Executive works fine for him.

He also understands 'legacy', him in Jacksonville is not an accident.

He built that franchise once already...

 

[Alsacs]

2 years ago.

Team Executive works fine for him.

He also understands 'legacy', him in Jacksonville is not an accident.

He built that franchise once already...

If Belichick will leave for the Giants.
Don’t say Coughlin wouldn’t go back on the sidelines for the Patriots

I mean your saying Belichick will leave a situation where has total roster control, He makes every football decision, He employs his children on the coaching staff, He'll have a statue

All because his 40-year-old QB played well and he had to trade a backup QB.

 

[OrangeDW]

If Belichick will leave for the Giants.
Don’t say Coughlin wouldn’t go back on the sidelines for the Patriots

I mean your saying Belichick will leave a situation where has total roster control, He makes every football decision, He employs his children on the coaching staff, He'll have a statue

All because his 40-year-old QB played well and he had to trade a backup QB.

He knows the Brady fall off is inevitable, and he knows he will have a hard time finding another perfect replacement. With the Giants he’s got the 2nd pick.

 

[KaiserUEO]

If Belichick will leave for the Giants.
Don’t say Coughlin wouldn’t go back on the sidelines for the Patriots

I mean your saying Belichick will leave a situation where has total roster control, He makes every football decision, He employs his children on the coaching staff, He'll have a statue

All because his 40-year-old QB played well and he had to trade a backup QB.

Yes.

It's over.

Congrats, seriously congratulations.

Holy Fluck Congrats...

but it's over.

And...

Kraft won't look to TC.

And TC won't look there.

 

[Alsacs]

Yes.

It's over.

Congrats, seriously congratulations.

Holy Fluck Congrats...

but it's over.

And...

Kraft won't look to TC.

And TC won't look there.

Well Mazel Tov if it happens.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Well Mazel Tov if it happens.

All I'm saying is...McDaniel, with the kids on staff and BB here with an 'office'...yet no official role.

Until I say otherwise...

 

[DeGrozz]

I stand by my statement that anyone who reads that article and think it's a "hit piece" is a Patriots homer/fanboy. Feel even more strongly about it than before.

For those who can't understand the difference between a report about three proud men who inevitably fell victim to their success and a "hit piece," I give you Manish Mehta...

I understand that the article on ESPN didn't call Tom Brady a pretty boy, like they did in the Daily News, but I don't think that precludes it from being a hit piece.

The author obviously drafted the story to fit his narrative/bias to paint the Patriots organization the way he wanted to paint it.

Immediately after the story Patriots beat writers, former players, and other journalists started tweeting out information contradicting what was in the article. This ranged from Jimmy G having full access to the TB12 facilities and never having contract discussions as stated in the article to no one know what a 'Patriot of the Week' was or others thinking 'Patriot of the Week' was an award for scout team players -- yet still, the article made it a big deal. This makes me believe that either the author did not want to look for evidence that didn't fit his narrative or ignored that evidence when piecing together his article. If you're sensationalizing something to make someone look bad, that seems like a hit piece to me, I'm not sure how else you can look at it. The author's goal was not to inform, it was obvious to influence.

There are also several smaller things that didn't sit right with me about the article. I don't remember seeing one quote on the record in the entire article. I know it's not the end-all-be-all but when journalism is fighting for clicks and not one person will go on record to support your story, that usually says something about what you're writing. Additionally, the author also didn't consult with the ESPN Patriots beat writers, which seems strange for trying to produce a ground breaking piece of journalism.

Usually when a story like this spreads like wildfire, one of two things will happen. The rest of the journalists start piling on (see: Penn State) or it gets widely questioned.

You can just read the following article below to see there's a lot more to the story that ESPN left out because it did not fit it's narrative:

How to process ESPN piece on Pats 'dysfunction'

That's why I think the ESPN story was garbage journalism and a hit piece (despite it not using the words 'pretty boy').

 

[bpo57]

Two-year dispensation - Giants and Pats play in the same division!

I'm fine with that just as long as the Eagles retain that home game every year at Met Life.

 

[DeGrozz]

Coughlin is the perfect replacement.
He still wants to coach.
He would have a veteran team with a good QB.
Wouldn’t be intimidated replacing BB.
He has connections to the area.
You think I am joking.
Coughlin would be on the short list.

Belichick and Eli vs Coughlin and Brady in next year's Super Bowl.

If only Francesca could be around to hype it...

 

[KaiserUEO]

I'm fine with that just as long as the Eagles retain that home game every year at Met Life.

There a 15-1 Giants Super Bowl winning season coupled with a 1-15 iggs 1 out there for sure.

Maybe even a 14-2...2-14 one...

 

[bpo57]

There a 15-1 Giants Super Bowl winning season coupled with a 1-15 iggs 1 out there for sure.

Maybe even a 14-2...2-14 one...

Anything is possible for sure, particularly after this year. There is no rhyme or reason to the NFC East. The favorite rarely ever wins that division. It's wide open but only one of the four teams has a franchise stud QB.

One area of concern for Philly, the Houston Texans are rumored to be trying to lure Joe Douglas - #2 in the Eagles' front office and brains of the operation - to be the Texans' GM. That would be a major blow to Philly.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Anything is possible for sure, particularly after this year. There is no rhyme or reason to the NFC East. The favorite rarely ever wins that division. It's wide open but only one of the four teams has a franchise stud QB.

One area of concern for Philly, the Houston Texans are rumored to be trying to lure Joe Douglas - #2 in the Eagles' front office and brains of the operation - to be the Texans' GM. That would be a major blow to Philly.

DeFilippo and Schwartz will also be gone.

 

[orangenirvana]

I understand that the article on ESPN didn't call Tom Brady a pretty boy, like they did in the Daily News, but I don't think that precludes it from being a hit piece.

The author obviously drafted the story to fit his narrative/bias to paint the Patriots organization the way he wanted to paint it.

Immediately after the story Patriots beat writers, former players, and other journalists started tweeting out information contradicting what was in the article. This ranged from Jimmy G having full access to the TB12 facilities and never having contract discussions as stated in the article to no one know what a 'Patriot of the Week' was or others thinking 'Patriot of the Week' was an award for scout team players -- yet still, the article made it a big deal. This makes me believe that either the author did not want to look for evidence that didn't fit his narrative or ignored that evidence when piecing together his article. If you're sensationalizing something to make someone look bad, that seems like a hit piece to me, I'm not sure how else you can look at it. The author's goal was not to inform, it was obvious to influence.

There are also several smaller things that didn't sit right with me about the article. I don't remember seeing one quote on the record in the entire article. I know it's not the end-all-be-all but when journalism is fighting for clicks and not one person will go on record to support your story, that usually says something about what you're writing. Additionally, the author also didn't consult with the ESPN Patriots beat writers, which seems strange for trying to produce a ground breaking piece of journalism.

Usually when a story like this spreads like wildfire, one of two things will happen. The rest of the journalists start piling on (see: Penn State) or it gets widely questioned.

You can just read the following article below to see there's a lot more to the story that ESPN left out because it did not fit it's narrative:

How to process ESPN piece on Pats 'dysfunction'

That's why I think the ESPN story was garbage journalism and a hit piece (despite it not using the words 'pretty boy').

That link pretty much confirms the ESPN story, aside from a couple of minor things that may differ simply due to the perception of the sources used. Both of which are irrelevant to the big picture anyway. Your insistence on calling it a "hit piece" remains strange. I can't imagine how worked up you get when ESPN or anyone else publishes a story about the Giants that dares to use unnamed sources.

 

[Alsacs]

That link pretty much confirms the ESPN story, aside from a couple of minor things that may differ simply due to the perception of the sources used. Both of which are irrelevant to the big picture anyway. Your insistence on calling it a "hit piece" remains strange. I can't imagine how worked up you get when ESPN or anyone else publishes a story about the Giants that dares to use unnamed sources.

The piece is being debunked more and more by the day.
Belichick and Kraft didn’t have a half-day meeting the day before the Jimmy G trade.
There are a lot of fallacies in the article.
The article was written as Belichick venting his frustration that Brady got his way.
Beyond that their is no story but just a bunch of crap thrown out to fill the appetite of Patriot dysfunction.
Kraft stepping in for Brady shouldn’t be a big deal.

 

[Alsacs]

Giants fans don’t want to move on Eli Manning.
It shouldn’t be a story that Kraft and Patriots fans don’t want to move on from Brady to Garrapolo when Brady isn’t done yet.

That story yesterday was Belichick pissed and he had trainers, Lombardi and Casserio staff getting his story out.

 

[orangenirvana]

The piece is being debunked more and more by the day.
Belichick and Kraft didn’t have a half-day meeting the day before the Jimmy G trade.
There are a lot of fallacies in the article.
The article was written as Belichick venting his frustration that Brady got his way.
Beyond that their is no story but just a bunch of crap thrown out to fill the appetite of Patriot dysfunction.
Kraft stepping in for Brady shouldn’t be a big deal.

 

[Alsacs]

Do better. My god this isn’t even good. Learn from Kaiser.

 

[Alsacs]

Kraft Denies Reports of Half-Day Meeting with Belichick

Kraft is on the record.
Kraft called the report that he and Belichick met for half a day during the season about Garoppolo “a total fabrication and fiction. I am telling you, it’s fiction.”

If Wickersham has information otherwise now he should have Kraft by the balls. If he doesn’t why not?

 

[orangenirvana]

Kraft Denies Reports of Half-Day Meeting with Belichick

Kraft is on the record.
Kraft called the report that he and Belichick met for half a day during the season about Garoppolo “a total fabrication and fiction. I am telling you, it’s fiction.”

If Wickersham has information otherwise now he should have Kraft by the balls. If he doesn’t why not?

I understand you want to stand at the mountaintop and claim "LIAR!" whenever a story about the Patriots is written. But this isn't Spygate or Deflategate. It's just a story which you yourself admitted is probably coming from Belichick. It's not a big deal. Brady and Belichick will be back in 2018. Why does it matter so much to you that sources are saying Belichick is upset that he had to let Garropolo go? In the end, it's not going to make a bit of difference.

 

[MSOrange]

Kraft 'absolutely' believes Belichick will return

 

[DeGrozz]

That link pretty much confirms the ESPN story, aside from a couple of minor things that may differ simply due to the perception of the sources used. Both of which are irrelevant to the big picture anyway. Your insistence on calling it a "hit piece" remains strange. I can't imagine how worked up you get when ESPN or anyone else publishes a story about the Giants that dares to use unnamed sources.

Your insistence on ignoring information that doesn't confirm your bias is really bizarre.

 

[Alsacs]

Marcus Mariota just threw a TD pass to Marcus Mariota.