Report: Brady's Injury Torn ACL

Reports are that he's done for the year!

Wow, what a blow to the Patriots.

And, to think I was all pissed off that my #1 pick in my fantasy draft only got 11 points (LT).

Lots of ff owners crying in their beers tonight.

posted by dviking at 09:56 PM - reply - flag:

I have him on my fantasy team but I have secondary quarterback. You have to draft knowing defenses target quarterbacks of his quality.

Here is a thought for all you rugby players and retired rugby players.

The moronic play by play announcers chronicall y misusing the term scrum as in rugby scrum. These announcer beleive they hip and up to date but are the most non qualified announcers because they do not research their work.

They most disgustedly mistake this terminology for the action they report aand we watch are actual rugby rucks where the player is tackled and the ball is contestable. Players jump in to control the ball which is controlled or not controlled by the pplayer tackled.

A rugby scrum isd an organized event due to minor infraction.

posted by tighthead at 10:14 PM - reply - flag:

In a time of National Distress like this, it's nice to know this kind of tragedy brings out the best in the Internet. It really speaks to what a melting pot this glorious land of ours is to see how many members of the Hindu faith have embraced the sport of American football; I've seen so many (admittedly poorly spelt and full of grammatical errors, but understandable) blog postings about karma. This will be a learning experience.

Might have to shut off my computer for a year or two.

posted by yerfatma at 10:19 PM - reply - flag:

Living in New England, getting to see the various backup QB's they've had rostered over the last few years get some PT during the preseason games, I'm not quite sure that Cassell is the best in show of that whole bunch.

I always hoped the team would keep trying to develop some of the guys like Rohan Davey that they've had rostered in recent times.

Of course the Pats were in the best shape ever at QB when Brady was Bledsoe's backup.

Today, Cassell looked a lot better than he had in the preseason games. Never having been a starter in college that I know of, he's got a good head about being a backup, but still it's helpful to have racked up some decent PT leading a collegiate offense at some point before this.

Belichick is naturally wired to win NFL games by 3 points or less. Last year seemed like a freak show. With the running back rotation he has at the moment, he should be able to win some games without Brady.

The run blocking has to look better than it did at times today. Then they have to find a way to keep Moss entertained if he'll be getting fewer deep throws. That old defense is going to be on the field too much, probably.

Belichick should be able to make something out of this situation. His linkage to one of the masters of making do with QB's is a definite plus. Parcells won the Super Bowl with Hostetler, got to the AFC title game with Testaverde and played .500 ball with Jay Lucas (which was a remarkable coaching job).

posted by beaverboard at 11:10 PM - reply - flag:

Did Tom Brady play rugby too?

I had to read that post 4 times just to make sure it was real. I don't root against NE, nor for them, but I believe they will be fine. Maybe not something-0 but still a contender for sure. Who knows, maybe Cassell will get it done. I haven't turned on any TV to see any sports' network Tom Brady "panic" info, so I'll assume it's a scrolling ticker running even through commercials by now.

NE fans will just have to settle for not beating everyone by 30+ points this year. It might just be 14 now.

posted by BoKnows at 12:29 AM - reply - flag:

tighthead...welcome to SportsFilter.
I didn't watch the Pats game, did the announcer somehow misuse the word scrum? Seems it got you rather upset, couldn't type straight afterwards.

For what it's worth, scrum is a abbreviation of the word scrummage, which is a modification of the word scrimmage, which is a derivitive of skirmish. One definition of skirmish is "a tough fight". Thus, for the announcer to say that there was a tough fight for the ball, really isn't a misuse of the word scrum. It just doesn't exactly fit the vocabulary of a rugby player.

Anyway, back to the Pats and Brady. Should be interesting to see how the year plays out. Brady to Moss made a lot of fantasy football owners rich, no back up QB is going to have the same results. Moss will ask to be traded by week 4!

posted by dviking at 01:13 AM - reply - flag:

"For what it's worth, scrum is a abbreviation of the word scrummage, which is a modification of the word scrimmage, which is a derivitive of skirmish. One definition of skirmish is "a tough fight". Thus, for the announcer to say that there was a tough fight for the ball, really isn't a misuse of the word scrum. It just doesn't exactly fit the vocabulary of a rugby player."

You've got the history of the word "scrum" completely screwed up (for one thing, in football history "scrum" or "scrummage" came first, before Americans modified it to the gridiron "scrimmage" concept), which perfectly illustrates the point that tighthead was making: most Americans use the word "scrum" without having a clue what they are talking about.

Look again: tighthead explained VERY CLEARLY how American sportscasters are misusing the word - a word they clearly think they are using in the rugby sense, not in the absract "skirmish" sense you are using. If you don't understand what tighthead is talking about, again, that proves his point. The fact that you don't understand his point doesn't invalidate it.

posted by dave2007 at 02:10 AM - reply - flag:

Well, I'm not really in the mood for a completely different line than what this post was all about (as if that ever happens on this site!)
However, skirmish came first, and according to my dictionary (truly, I'm reading it as I type) scrummage is a variant of skrimmage, not the other way around. Now, perhaps the announcer was using it incorrectly, or perhaps he has the same Websters that I do, or perhaps he should have said ruck instead of scrum,I'm over it.

Back to Brady if we could.

posted by dviking at 02:58 AM - reply - flag:

Y'know, I'm an avowed Pats hater for various reasons, jealousy being the largest of all, but there's no joy or karmic comeuppance in this. Brady is a class act who plays the game with a real passion and the league will miss his star power this year. I'm all for watching the Pats fall flat on their face, but not at the expense of a true professional going down. I'd much rather it be an ego clash or a locker room brawl concerning the epistemology of the word "scrum." That being the case, I'd hate to be a DB facing him next year.

posted by tahoemoj at 04:45 AM - reply - flag:

The suckiest part is how this would be more palatable if they'd just not had that last 60 seconds against the Giants in the Superbowl; having a tidy 19-0 would make season-ending injuries, if that is the case, more easy to digest. It's like how with 2004 and then 2007, I'd not be sad if the Sox don't win the World Series this year: that amazing 2004 run and improbable victory was so great, who cares about the WS for a long time? It's nice, but not as critical. Had the Patriots gone 19-0, it'd have been like Roy Hobbs' last homer, where you don't mind if his career ends and he just plays catch in some Iowa field for the rest of his life.

Instead, it's like a historic moment got knocked off the rails somehow, and the Patriots and the NFL seem to have come from some weird alternate dimension as reality gets a bit twisted a la "Sound of Thunder".

And yes, I'm sure there's plenty of karma-cunts out there wanting to pounce on how NE got "what they deserved" for... running their franchise well and succeeding despite a tight salary cap that applies to every team in the league.

posted by Hal Incandenza at 06:48 AM - reply - flag:

I don't think karma applies here, since the Patriots dropped the Super Bowl and that perfect 19-0 season along with it. What it does demonstrate is how amazing it was the Pats got to that point and almost had a perfect season, given how easy it is for a season to be wrecked by an injury like this.

The torn ACL diagnosis has yet to be confirmed, so perhaps there's a chance the injury is less severe.

posted by rcade at 07:28 AM - reply - flag:

You can't be a fan of a sport and then be happy that one of the best players in the league is injured.

The Colts looked bad. The Pats have to play with a back-up QB. Maybe we will see some of that parity we have heard so much about.

posted by bperk at 08:31 AM - reply - flag:

In the small world dep't: previously mentioning Parcells and Hostetler, etc., I read late yesterday that Chris, Son of Simms may be coming in for a look at QB with the Pats.

That makes sense in one way, like the John Lynch move did previously - get a good available guy to fill a big need.

But it doesn't seem like a good Belichick move to bring Simms in. He's a lefty, they'd have to rework the OL assignments, maybe move people around up there. From what I saw yesterday, the OL is still in a bit of the funk it was in during the Super Bowl. They have some things to figure out with that group.

Bringing in a lefty would not help. Plus, then he has to cram the playbook.

Cassell is already well-entrenched with the system, and he fits with the Pats MO of making do with what's there. Like making Troy Brown a DB and kick returner as needed.

Belichick may be better off sticking with Cassell as the starter. Plus, the Pats' special teams units also did not look sharp at times in the KC game. He's got to address that as well ASAP. So bringing in a new QB might be a bit much.

posted by beaverboard at 08:35 AM - reply - flag:

The NFL Network is confirming that Brady's injury is a season-ender. Ugh.

posted by rcade at 08:44 AM - reply - flag:

Manhattan Cheered Tom Bradys Injury. Did You?

posted by yerfatma at 08:58 AM - reply - flag:

I think there is a difference between cheering when a player is injured and then walks off the field as opposed to being taken off on a stretcher.

Since Brady walked off the field, I'm guessing the folks in Manhattan assumed it was not a season ending situation. I could be wrong.

While they will obviously look to bring in another QB to bolster the ranks, Cassell will be starting for the foreseeable future.

Maybe Favre took out a hit on Brady, easiest way for the Jets to get to the playoffs!

posted by dviking at 09:22 AM - reply - flag:

Man, they should have gone with Michael Bishop when they had the chance. See, he's mobile and he could have avoided that hit!

posted by Mayor Curley at 09:24 AM - reply - flag:

dviking, I agree with what you said in principle, but I posted the link because of the comments there. 24 hours later, it's a seasn-ending injury and:

"You better believe Id have joined in. I cheered in the comfort of my own vehicle. That smug schmuck and his cheating coach deserve some comeuppance. After they finagled the tuck rule which should have seen them off that season, and with everything else, they were due some bad karma"

posted by yerfatma at 09:28 AM - reply - flag:

hey, Culpepper is sitting at home waiting for the phone to ring

posted by Debo270 at 09:35 AM - reply - flag:

Cheering an injury is pretty bad -- I remember when Michael Irvin's neck injury was cheered in the City of Brotherly Love.

Talk about inviting bad karma to land on your own team.

posted by rcade at 09:51 AM - reply - flag:

I honestly don't think people who cheer this kind of thing really have a favorite team. The fun kids at Kissing Suzy Kolber have already moved on to hoping Favre or Romo gets hurt next. And I can't for the life of me figure out what deadspin commenters will do if they can't make racist jokes by attributing them as the thoughts of New England fans.

posted by yerfatma at 10:14 AM - reply - flag:

I was at the Bills game when I heard the buzz about this injury. Although I didn't hear actual cheering, I'd be lying if I said many people didn't seem happy about it. But what they were happy about, for the most part, was the idea this situation could possibly give the Bills a better chance at competing in the division (they are improving, but still need all the help they can get). That being said, I agree with what bperk said. Any real fan of the game can't be happy when one of it's biggest stars gets injured. But it happens. Brady isn't immune. With all the weapons New England has, though, they will still be a force to be reckoned with.

posted by dyams at 10:27 AM - reply - flag:

That Kissing Suzy Kolber site is twisted. I hope the batteries in their remotes go dead, and when they try to pry their fat asses out of their Lazyboy recliners to go change the channel, I hope they tear their ACL's.

Bunch of dumb asses hoping top players get hurt.

posted by dviking at 10:34 AM - reply - flag:

Look again: tighthead explained VERY CLEARLY..

He did? How in the world were you even able to comprehend WTF he was attempting to say in the first place?

This whole situation with Tom Brady is clearly heartbreaking....ok, who am I kidding? I am not going to sit here and bullshit you, I'm rejoicing!! Don't get it twisted, it's a damn shame to see Brady's season done but oh well, this is football we're talking about here. Players get hurt and the organization should have a back up in place for situations like this and if the so happen to have a scrub in place, so be it and good luck!!

IMO, this just made it so much easier for my 'Boys to win the whole damn thing this year. What a start to a great season...except in New England of course.

posted by BornIcon at 11:02 AM - reply - flag:

Silly me, I thought "scrum" referred to software development. Maybe I need to get out more...

posted by drumdance at 11:17 AM - reply - flag:

Players get hurt and the organization should have a back up in place for situations like this and if the so happen to have a scrub in place, so be it and good luck!!

This has come up a great deal over the course of the pre-season and I feel it doesn't hold up to inspection: how many teams have one great QB, much less two? To suggest the Pats should have stockpiled arms ignores teams like Chicago that couldn't find an arm in a wood chipper. Of course, it's the same logic that makes Pats fans think Dante Culpepper really has been rail-roaded and could play NFL-caliber football at the drop of a hat.

posted by yerfatma at 11:27 AM - reply - flag:

I predict that in Gregg Easterbrook's column tomorrow, he will say something to the effect of "Not to suggest the Pats had this coming, but . . . they had this coming." Not in those words, mind you, but I'm sure it will be hard for him to refrain from working the "karma" angle (although it will be more along the lines of "the football gods chortled"). He will also say that Cleveland wussed out by kicking a field goal down 28-7, which brought out the boo birds in Cleveland, "as it should have." And he will talk about some Eagle girl's rack and make up some shit about quantum physics.

posted by holden at 11:38 AM - reply - flag:

Dante Culpepper Randy Moss reunion Tour?

posted by Debo270 at 11:52 AM - reply - flag:

You can't be a fan of a sport and then be happy that one of the best players in the league is injured.

Don't know how you can make that blanket statement. I can't say I'm "happy", but I'm certainly not "upset". A team that stood in the path from my team and a chance a SB suddenly got A LOT worse. That's not exactly reason for me to hang my head.

And no BS about "you should want your team to face the other at their full strength". Sorry, but that just doesn't happen in football. My team lost a defensive lineman and the NFL's leading rusher a few games before the season ended and nobody was saying "let's cancel the playoffs...Pittsburgh can't compete because it's missing 2 of it's key players". You play with what you got and key players come and go through the season. I'd much rather face a Pats team without Brady, just like the Jags preferred to meet a Steeler team without Parker.

Regardless, I don't see what that has to do with my being a fan of the sport (I can see how you can say because I feel that way I'm a heartless bastard, but I can assure you I'm a huge football fan and watching the games without Brady there won't diminish my enjoyment a single bit).

posted by bdaddy at 11:59 AM - reply - flag:

Looking ahead to this week's game, Favre is thinking: the Pats have lost a ton of picks in the secondary from last year's team. He's rubbing his hands together.

The Pats secondary is thinking: Favre hasn't played that much in the Meadowlands wind bowl. Bring on the wayward Stinger missles from #4 and let's see who ends up catching them.

I see the Pats getting the better of the deal and making life tough for Favre in Week 2.

I also think Buffalo should be able to take a game from the Brady-less Pats this year.

There will probably be a lot of fan cams being waved around in the Jets crowd. Their first chance to give it to Belichick since Week 1 last year.

posted by beaverboard at 11:59 AM - reply - flag:

Dante Culpepper Randy Moss reunion Tour?

That's what I was thinking. Seems he retired a week too early. I can't imagine why the Pats wouldn't prefer to bring him in for a shot versus Simms.

posted by bdaddy at 12:00 PM - reply - flag:

Dante Culpepper Randy Moss reunion Tour?

That's what I was thinking. Seems he retired a week too early. I can't imagine why the Pats wouldn't prefer to bring him in for a shot versus Simms.

Maybe because he's basically immobile and is not known for making particularly good decisions? What the Pats will need and what Belichick will require is a QB that does not make a lot of mistakes. Daunte Culpepper is not that guy.

posted by holden at 12:28 PM - reply - flag:

Seems he retired a week too early. I can't imagine why the Pats wouldn't prefer to bring him in for a shot versus Simms.

Imagine this: In 2004 when both Culpepper and Moss were with the Vikings, they were doing what Brady and Moss did last year and that was breaking records. Plus, Culpepper and Moss were one hell of a quarterback/wide reciever duo, so yeah, I don't see a reason as to why they would want to bring in a 31 year old quarterback with a laser for an arm and the accuracy to match.

posted by BornIcon at 12:39 PM - reply - flag:

The thing that gets me about this is that Randy Moss came out and said that the hit was a cheap shot and a dirty play. Now I might not a ref but from what I seen the o-lineman pushed the blitzing safty to the groung because he was gonna beat him with speed,which is what most o-lineman are taught to do,it just happened that when the safty hit the ground his momentum carried him into Brady's lower leg(not his knee)and Brady got twisted up.

While I do not like the Pats it is a shame to see such a good player put on the shelf with such a devastating injury,but I think it reminds us all that no matter how good you are in sports that luck (both good and bad)does play a role.

posted by jda at 01:03 PM - reply - flag:

Culpepper was a hell of a QB for a couple of years. While I'd like to believe playing for awful teams was his only problem since the Madden cover, it looked to me (albeit from a distance) like he'd eaten himself out of a job.

posted by yerfatma at 01:31 PM - reply - flag:

I think the reason the Pats won't bring Culpepper's laser arm back onto the field is that his knees are in worse shape than Brady's at this point. Culpepper needs to be able to move in order to be effective, he lost that ability.

Too bad though, I could have worn my Culpepper jersey again. Earlier in this decade invested in both a #11 and a #84 jersey...figuring that dynamic duo was going to be in purple for years to come. Hope my Adrian Peterson jersey is valid for at least a couple of years!

posted by dviking at 01:34 PM - reply - flag:

"dviking, I agree with what you said in principle, but I posted the link because of the comments there. 24 hours later, it's a seasn-ending injury"

Yes, Fatty, but ignorance is everywhere. The guy you quoted was a Raiders fan. Here are two more quotes from the article you linked:

"Maybe next time NY gets attacked by a terrorist entity the rest of the nation should start whooping it up like the whole arab world did."

"Theyre like that crazy bitch on you tube that cheered for 9/11."

Really? 9/11? I can understand being mad that someone cheered your QB being injured. But 9/11?

I also found it interesting to read all the posts in the Times article by transplants who live in NYC and hate it (I get this alot in L.A. as well). If you don't like it, why not get the fuck out?

All this being said, I was looking forward to the Favre/Brady matchup and I don't cheer injuries.

posted by cjets at 01:54 PM - reply - flag:

I'd much rather face a Pats team without Brady, just like the Jags preferred to meet a Steeler team without Parker.

That is being a fan of your team, not being a fan of the game of football. If you want every team that isn't your team to suck, then you don't like football, you just like your team to win. You can be both - if you want to see a great game, but still see your team win.

posted by bperk at 02:14 PM - reply - flag:

bperk. Do you honestly think players and fans alike in the division especially are not pumped knowing Brady is out. I would like to come live in your world for a while if you do. Unless you are a new England fan, (most of which are currently on suicide watch.) or a fantasy owner, you cant say that Brady being gone doesnt open up the league a little. No one hopes for serious injury, but most people dont feel bad for the other team either. With Indy stinking it up last night, and the Chargers not playing well, alot of AFC teams are feeling they have a chance today.

posted by Debo270 at 02:24 PM - reply - flag:

Culpepper is more that guy than Chris Simms, no?

Culpepper has a career completion % north of 60% and a QB rating close to 90. How does that compare to Simm's career stats?

Seems it would make more sense to take a chance on a guy whose at least shown in the past he can play the position, versus a guy who hasn't at the pro-level.

posted by bdaddy at 02:30 PM - reply - flag:

I respectfully disagree. I watched 9 hours of football yesterday flipping between about 6 different games. I also spent $300+ on the NFL package to allow me to do such things. I've spent roughly 2 hours today reading through all various NFL articles on all teams consuming as much info as I can from yesterday's results, and who knows how much time for the weeks leading up to the season.

I'm not sure how that translates to me not being a fan of the game of football or a fan of just a single team.

Like I said, you can't make that generalization (happy brady is out = non-football fan) because it simply isn't true. I'm certainly a "football" fan, and I'm shedding no tears at the moment.

posted by bdaddy at 02:42 PM - reply - flag:

Amen bdaddy!!!! Well spoken.

posted by Debo270 at 02:44 PM - reply - flag:

Culpepper is more that guy than Chris Simms, no?

Culpepper has a career completion % north of 60% and a QB rating close to 90. How does that compare to Simm's career stats?

Seems it would make more sense to take a chance on a guy whose at least shown in the past he can play the position, versus a guy who hasn't at the pro-level.

Culpepper is just not the player he once was. Since his monster 2004 season, he has 13 TDs to 20 INTs, QB ratings of 72, 77 and 78 (in 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively), and has fumbled the ball 17 times in 18 games (5 of which he recovered). Whether he's better or worse than Simms at this point, I'm not sure. I should have limited my quote of your original statement to the "That's what I was thinking. Seems he retired a week too early" part of it, leaving off the "I can't imagine why the Pats wouldn't prefer to bring him in for a shot versus Simms" part of it. I suspect neither one is the answer.

posted by holden at 02:48 PM - reply - flag:

I'm certainly a "football" fan, and I'm shedding no tears at the moment.

I'm not sad either, but I am not happy that he is out. That is what I said. I didn't say that all football fans should begin a deep depression until the return of Brady. Are you rejoicing that one of the league's best players is out? Is football and the league better with Brady out?

posted by bperk at 03:01 PM - reply - flag:

To hell with the karma talk; I'm very zen about this.

(for the oblivious: not a fan of stupid appropriation of other people's spiritual tradition in the service of one's rather trite conversational points)

I'm reminded of a day in 2001 when a Patriots quarterback left the game with a serious injury and the backup stepped in. Things went okay after that. Now, I don't think this backup is as good as that backup was then, but who knew at the time? Those who were actually around watching the Patriots at the time may remember the moniker "Palpitation Pats" that got hung on them because of their narrow margins of victory, the "winning ugly", the "a win's a win". Brady is a fantastic quarterback, but he didn't come in and sprinkle magic dust on the Pats in '01 and make it all happen. Magic dust wasn't needed then, and it isn't needed now. Will this make things interesting? You bet, but in ways other than what some people think -- the Patriots as they were 27 hours ago were an important element in a lot of teams' strategy. Now the Patriots are something different, still with plenty of winning potential. I wish Tom the very best of care and healing, and I have every hope that the Pats will do what they do best: creating the winningest possible team out of what they have...not what they wish they had.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:14 PM - reply - flag:

Brady has had a remarlable streak of good luck, and combined with his skill has really been fortunate up to this point in his career. Lets face it, it was an injury to Bledsoe which set his good fortune in motion. Well I think luck has a way of running out, which I believe it did for Brady in the fourth quarter of last years Super Bowl.

Now it looks like Brady will just have to deal with some adversity for a while. He sure dealt well with all his good fortune in the past.

I am not saying I am happy or sad just that things have a way of evening out. The run New England has had for long time was due to a good team, making good decisions and having a lot of very good luck. Now some of that luck seems to be changing. They still have a good team and will perform well with or without Brady. Then again maybe he just has a minor injury and this is another one of the coaches plans to put out some misinformation to throw off the press and the opponents. I wouldn't put it past him. He is a master at deception.

It easy not to like the Pats, after all for so long everything has gone their way. I do feel bad for Brady, but would enjoy seeing the Pats reduced to just a good team instead of an UBER TEAM.

posted by Atheist at 04:05 PM - reply - flag:

Culpepper is just not the player he once was. Since his monster 2004 season, he has 13 TDs to 20 INTs, QB ratings of 72, 77 and 78 (in 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively)

OK. I also realize you're not saying he's not better/worse than Simms so wasn't really directed at you as much as just talking out loud.

I guess my point is that I was aware of those 3 bad seasons, but I also know that those 3 bad seasons came on 3 pretty bad teams, and at least 1 of those he was severely injured and rushed back.

Maybe those 3 bad seasons are an indicator that he isn't a good QB unless he has good players around him (which NE does). Isn't it worth a tryout to see if that is the case (as opposed to going with a Simms-type player who has shown he can't play as well even with a pretty good team, like Tampa).

posted by bdaddy at 04:06 PM - reply - flag:

Interestingly, Belichick said the team hasn't contacted any QB, but rather that agents have been calling them. It sounded like he was ready to sink or swim with the players he has. I'd love to believe Cassell can be Brady 08, but he looked like hell in the preseason. Kevin O'Connell, this year's 3rd-round pick, looked a lot better, but then O'Connell was playing against backups and most likely using a drastically reduced playbook, so the comparison is unfair.

posted by yerfatma at 04:12 PM - reply - flag:

I don't like to see anybody go down,but it happens to all the teams.Now we will see what the players are made of.Belichick said that they were the best team in the NFL. Now we will see if he was right.Randy Moss called it a dirty hit,but if it happened to another team, would he still call it dirty. I doubt it.I honestly feel that the Patriots will be lucky if they win 8 games.And they have the easist schedule in the NFL.

posted by Doehead at 04:12 PM - reply - flag:

So much for the completion of the perfect season. I'm just hoping to make the playoffs. I kind of feel like we're the underdogs now with a QB who hasn't started a game since 1999 when he was in high school. Hopefully he will recover quickly and we can expect to see him next year.

posted by sox1903 at 05:58 PM - reply - flag:

I honestly feel that the Patriots will be lucky if they win 8 games.And they have the easist schedule in the NFL.

I'll remind you of both of those statements in January.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:59 PM - reply - flag:

Seeing as how they're already up 1-0, I wouldn't bet on Pats finishing anything less than 10-6.

posted by dviking at 08:38 PM - reply - flag:

Do you honestly think players and fans alike in the division especially are not pumped knowing Brady is out?

I rather have Brady out there with the Pats when my Cowboys win it all this year but like I said in my earlier post, this is football and injuries happen. Of course I would want the team that I root for, beat another team with all of their best players playing but that's not reality. We all know or should know that not every player will be healthy when the playoffs roll around but that's the sport these great athletes chose to play.

Since his monster 2004 season, he has 13 TDs to 20 INTs, QB ratings of 72, 77 and 78 (in 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively), and has fumbled the ball 17 times in 18 games (5 of which he recovered)

You're talking about when Culpepper came back to play with the Dolphins barely 1 year since his injury. He was basically immobile and came back way too early. Then, he played sparingly when he was traded to the Raiders because he never truly let his injury heal properly.

The bottom line, Culpepper can still play. Even with the knee injury, he is still a better quarterback than 50% of the quarterbacks out there. Is Ken Orton a better quarterback than Culpepper? How about J.T. Sullivan? Culpepper's mobility may be limited but there is nothing wrong with his arm strength or accuracy and the only reason IMO he isn't employed in the NFL is because he chose to be his own agent. If he were to hire an agent to speak dollar and cents for him, then maybe we wouldn't be talking about Culpepper as an ex-NFL quarterback.

posted by BornIcon at 07:45 AM - reply - flag:

Seeing as how they're already up 1-0, I wouldn't bet on Pats finishing anything less than 10-6.

I think you can tell very little from a game in which they beat probably the worst team in the league by a mere 5 yards. Certainly not that they'll finish better than 10-6.

If Cassel plays like he did Sunday they could still finish 10-6. But if he plays like he did in the pre-season and at the end of last season in spot duty, then they'll be lucky to win 6. Other than Sunday he has been absolutely atrocious every time I've seen him play (I mean worst in the league bad...worse than most peoples 3rd stringers bad).

If he were to hire an agent to speak dollar and cents for him, then maybe we wouldn't be talking about Culpepper as an ex-NFL quarterback.

From what I understand he was offered 2 jobs, both 1 year deals (GB and Pittsburgh) and turned them both down. So I think part of why he's unemployed is his own fault.

posted by bdaddy at 09:56 AM - reply - flag:

From what I understand he was offered 2 jobs, both 1 year deals (GB and Pittsburgh) and turned them both down. So I think part of why he's unemployed is his own fault

Which is why I suggested that he hire an agent.

If a player represents himself, it's fair to say that the organization that may be interested in said player will have a tough time trying to explain the player's pros and cons to the player/agent, in this case Dante Culpepper, who will put pride over a paycheck as Culpepper did.

With so many lackluster QB's playing this season on playoff caliber squads, Culpepper had a shot of making the roster of Green Bay or Pittsburg but chose to retire instead because he wanted a chance to be the starting QB. IMHO, Culpepper and Moss had a genuine chemistry in Minnesota that few QB/WR combos can ever dream of and maybe....just maybe, New England wants the sequel.

posted by BornIcon at 10:31 AM - reply - flag:

BornIcon:

I think you can tell very little from a game in which they beat probably the worst team in the league by a mere 5 yards.

So, the Chiefs are "probably the worst team in the league"? By what measure?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:58 AM - reply - flag:

So, the Chiefs are "probably the worst team in the league"? By what measure?

By watching them? :-)

Seriously, it's not just me saying it....they were at the bottom of several pre-season "power polls" as well (for what that's worth). Here's a sampling of some of the prominent ones.

msn.foxsports.com

www.sportsline.com

sports.espn.go.com

posted by bdaddy at 12:12 PM - reply - flag:

the Chiefs are not a good team.

For what it's worth, one of those lists had five teams in their top ten that lost this weekend!

posted by dviking at 01:32 PM - reply - flag:

BornIcon:

I think you can tell very little from a game in which they beat probably the worst team in the league by a mere 5 yards.

So, the Chiefs are "probably the worst team in the league"? By what measure?

lil_brown_bat:

You're confused, I never wrote that.

posted by BornIcon at 01:42 PM - reply - flag:

BornIcon:

I think you can tell very little from a game in which they beat probably the worst team in the league by a mere 5 yards.

So, the Chiefs are "probably the worst team in the league"? By what measure?

lil_brown_bat:

You're confused, I never wrote that.

Perhaps she meant bdaddy.

posted by tommytrump at 02:03 PM - reply - flag:

So, the Chiefs are "probably the worst team in the league"? By what measure?

Them sucking like an Electrolux? Losing 10 straight regular season games? Having a running game and almost nothing else? They are not good.

I am blindly hoping the pre-season games meant nothing and Cassell can manage a running & defense team to the AFC East crown. And that's about it.

posted by yerfatma at 03:10 PM - reply - flag:

By the way, has anyone called the police to supervise Brady? We wouldn't want him to go to any friends houses or anything crazy like that.

posted by BoKnows at 03:21 PM - reply - flag:

As a PATRIOTS fan i cant believe what has been written here people actually happy Tom got hurt. Well in that case I hope every quarterback gets hurt 2 make things fair. All I want 4 Christmas is more torn acl's haha. Knowing Bret Favre he will retire AGAIN by next week so 1 less we have 2 worry about. Put both the Mannings rings 2gether and u still come up short of Tom Brady's. I think what happened 2 Tom was that he lost his balance with all those SUPERBOWL rings on his hand. WE WILL PREVAIL with or without him . VOTE OBAMA 08 GO PATRIOTS GO!!!!!

posted by cRoW at 07:22 PM - reply - flag:

ummm cRoW, nice first post on the site.
Seems as though this thread has already had one nut posting an odd first post.

Leave your politics out of a good football discussion

posted by dviking at 08:51 PM - reply - flag:

cRoW- uR txtng sux...
Seriously, try to write comprehensively on your posts and they may be taken seriously. I went through all the posts on here and it doesn't seem that many people are really "happy" that Brady got hurt. They just do not think the world should stop because of this injury. Players are injured all the time.

Although it is unfortunate, it is not tragic by any means. An athlete from another sport (Evan Tanner-MMA, UFC) died today and not many people even seem to notice or care. Yet a football player gets injured and the world is supposed to stop? It is one season out of a players career. I am not a Brady fan, but he will be back next year and he will be great again, or at least get the chance to play football and enjoy life.
Keep it in perspective.

posted by JohnnyBallsack at 10:06 PM - reply - flag:

crow, while I'm sure some appreciate your political stance, this isn't the place for it. Nor is it the place for stfu, lol, omg or any other AOL-ism. Check out the link below for the site guidelines.

sportsfilter.info

posted by BoKnows at 08:44 PM - reply - flag:

we are not in school asswipe

Your eloquence is stunning. Also, if I may say so, your primary tactic of changing your target's screen name, as to imply his lack of testicular content, was a coup d' etat, to be sure, although the irony content was a little high for the subject matter.

I'm just sayin'.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 10:06 PM - reply - flag:

Crow... I did not attack you personally, so get over it. I was trying to tell you that you will be taken more seriously without typing like a little schoolgirl texting her friends. I would also watch with the threats and attacks, as I doubt seriously you would ever speak to me like that to my face without pissing your pants.

Oh and by the way, great job talking ill of the dead. One day you will have a friend or loved one die and hopefully you will be treated with a little more respect than you show. You see I knew Evan Tanner and he was a great guy. A bit eccentric, but very down to earth, a classy guy and extremely friendly outside the cage. He would give the shirt off his own back to help anyone in need.

posted by JohnnyBallsack at 11:29 PM - reply - flag:

"I'd much rather it be an ego clash or a locker room brawl concerning the epistemology of the word 'scrum.'"

Just for the heck of it, i think the word you're looking for is etymology, not epistemology. You see etymology is derived from the words . . .

posted by brainofdtrain at 02:59 AM - reply - flag:

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Comments