|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 9, 2017 14:39:44 GMT -5
I’m not saying anything about the Pats other than they play in a weak ass division. As I have said numerous times already, move them to any division.. maybe they only make it to 5 SBs instead of 7, maybe so maybe not, maybe they win 1 less SB, maybe, maybe not... this isn’t about the Patriots.. it’s about the rest of the division they are in. The patriots play in a weak division. Period. Does that mean the Patriots aren’t the best team in the NFL... nope! They are still the single best team in the NFL over that period. But, and you do throw a big BUT in there, they play in a weak division which may have contributed to their success, if not their greatness, over that period. Like I have said earlier, we'll never know how they would have done if the other teams in the AFCE produced better competition or if they played in another division. Where you have been getting in trouble, TFB, is your "weak division" position, which no matter how valid is devaluing the success of this franchise. If another poster, not like a regular here and the Pats' fan you are, let's say UD6, presented these arguments like you are, you just may be one of the first to counter UD's position is nothing but a slap at the success of the Patriots by a jealous poster. I can’t control how people take it, all I can do is present the facts... like it or not. Nope, we will never know how they would do in a different division, as I said several time already, maybe the attend 2 less Super Bowls, maybe they win 4 instead of 5. We won’t know. But I think it’s safe to say they play in a weak division and they wouldn’t have made more Super Bowls being in a different division. How do you feel about those two comments?
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Dec 9, 2017 14:53:25 GMT -5
But, and you do throw a big BUT in there, they play in a weak division which may have contributed to their success, if not their greatness, over that period. Like I have said earlier, we'll never know how they would have done if the other teams in the AFCE produced better competition or if they played in another division. Where you have been getting in trouble, TFB, is your "weak division" position, which no matter how valid is devaluing the success of this franchise. If another poster, not like a regular here and the Pats' fan you are, let's say UD6, presented these arguments like you are, you just may be one of the first to counter UD's position is nothing but a slap at the success of the Patriots by a jealous poster. I can’t control how people take it, all I can do is present the facts... like it or not. Nope, we will never know how they would do in a different division, as I said several time already, maybe the attend 2 less Super Bowls, maybe they win 4 instead of 5. We won’t know. But I think it’s safe to say they play in a weak division and they wouldn’t have made more Super Bowls being in a different division. How do you feel about those two comments? Who knows, TFB. For all we know, the Pats may have the same effect on the other teams in the new division like they have in the AFCE. We can "what if" this to death and it won't change history as we know it now.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 9, 2017 15:13:27 GMT -5
I can’t control how people take it, all I can do is present the facts... like it or not. Nope, we will never know how they would do in a different division, as I said several time already, maybe the attend 2 less Super Bowls, maybe they win 4 instead of 5. We won’t know. But I think it’s safe to say they play in a weak division and they wouldn’t have made more Super Bowls being in a different division. How do you feel about those two comments? Who knows, TFB. For all we know, the Pats may have the same effect on the other teams in the new division like they have in the AFCE. We can "what if" this to death and it won't change history as we know it now. Just keep winning and collecting Lombardi trophies, that’s the bottom line.
|
|
|
Post by digger0862 on Dec 9, 2017 16:23:13 GMT -5
The great AFC North, lol.
|
|
|
Post by salcon on Dec 9, 2017 16:39:09 GMT -5
So, Tom Brady really isn't the GOAT because he benefited from playing in weak-ass division his entire career?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 16:41:47 GMT -5
Good point, if TB played in such a weak division, you might have to think twice about him being the GOAT. Had it too easy compared to the greatest.
You cant have it both ways, say he plays in the weakest division, then claim he's the greatest. Probably put an asterisk when he enters the HOF. Played in the AFC East.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 9, 2017 16:44:38 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 18:07:02 GMT -5
It's a hypothetical to illustrate the point. Just because one division gets more playoff appearances doesn't indicate that the division is necessarily that much more competitive than another who is getting nearly as many wins but not as many playoff berths. The bottom line is that the other teams in the division have only 6% less wins than the league average (even considering they play the best team of all twice a year). There's no getting around that. Case in point. This year the AFC North could possibly have had three playoff teams had Cincy held on against Pittsburgh. Playoff counts mean nothing in this argument. I agree. The last few teams make it in by the skin of their teeth virtually every year, often with tie-breakers. A few bounces of the ball a different way and the playoff berths for a certain division can be dramatically different. While looking at the playoffs could be a small part of the equation, W/Ls have to be the major consideration, sine they are the whole essence of the question after all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 18:15:43 GMT -5
It's a hypothetical to illustrate the point. Just because one division gets more playoff appearances doesn't indicate that the division is necessarily that much more competitive than another who is getting nearly as many wins but not as many playoff berths. The bottom line is that the other teams in the division have only 6% less wins than the league average (even considering they play the best team of all twice a year). There's no getting around that. Yeah, I knew it was a hypothetical. Hypotheticals don’t work, Babe. That’s why nobody ever uses hypotheticals. Lol. Come on, get serious. “They play the best team of all twice a year”. That argument doesn’t work either, Babe. We already covered this multiple times. The packers are the dominate team in their division the past 10 years, every team in their division has to play them twice a year too... yet, the other teams in that division make the playoffs twice the amount of times the jets, Bills and Dolphins have. The AFC North is more dominate of a division than the AFC East.. even with the Browns in the division dragging the averages down they are still a tougher division than the AFC East. Hypotheticals can illustrate a point. Mine did, lol. I also proved the point by showing that the 2014 AFCN spectacular 3 teams going to the playoffs was a close call indeed. That reality follows the same reasoning as the hypothetical. And of course the best team factor is significant since, you know, they win more than anybody, lol. If you want to say being in the same division as the Pack is as tough for those teams as it is for the other teams in our division, get back to me when the Pack wins as often as we do. BOTTOM LINE: The other teams in our division have lost 6% more than the NFL average over 10 years. That's just under 1 game a year. ONE game below the norm. That's hardly deserving of the "weak" descriptor. All else withers in the face of this fact.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 9, 2017 22:17:57 GMT -5
Yeah, I knew it was a hypothetical. Hypotheticals don’t work, Babe. That’s why nobody ever uses hypotheticals. Lol. Come on, get serious. “They play the best team of all twice a year”. That argument doesn’t work either, Babe. We already covered this multiple times. The packers are the dominate team in their division the past 10 years, every team in their division has to play them twice a year too... yet, the other teams in that division make the playoffs twice the amount of times the jets, Bills and Dolphins have. The AFC North is more dominate of a division than the AFC East.. even with the Browns in the division dragging the averages down they are still a tougher division than the AFC East. Hypotheticals can illustrate a point. Mine did, lol. I also proved the point by showing that the 2014 AFCN spectacular 3 teams going to the playoffs was a close call indeed. That reality follows the same reasoning as the hypothetical. And of course the best team factor is significant since, you know, they win more than anybody, lol. If you want to say being in the same division as the Pack is as tough for those teams as it is for the other teams in our division, get back to me when the Pack wins as often as we do. BOTTOM LINE: The other teams in our division have lost 6% more than the NFL average over 10 years. That's just under 1 game a year. ONE game below the norm. That's hardly deserving of the "weak" descriptor. All else withers in the face of this fact. You are comparing the other teams in the AFC East (44%) against ALL teams in ALL divisions (50%). That is apples and oranges and makes the AFC East look bad. Look at the numbers I posted which are apples against apples and they show that the AFC East is just 0.6% from being the best and is third. The difference is just two games out of the 450 out of division games in the last 15 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 22:34:02 GMT -5
Hypotheticals can illustrate a point. Mine did, lol. I also proved the point by showing that the 2014 AFCN spectacular 3 teams going to the playoffs was a close call indeed. That reality follows the same reasoning as the hypothetical. And of course the best team factor is significant since, you know, they win more than anybody, lol. If you want to say being in the same division as the Pack is as tough for those teams as it is for the other teams in our division, get back to me when the Pack wins as often as we do. BOTTOM LINE: The other teams in our division have lost 6% more than the NFL average over 10 years. That's just under 1 game a year. ONE game below the norm. That's hardly deserving of the "weak" descriptor. All else withers in the face of this fact. You are comparing the other teams in the AFC East (44%) against ALL teams in ALL divisions (50%). That is apples and oranges and makes the AFC East look bad. Look at the numbers I posted which are apples against apples and they show that the AFC East is just 0.6% from being the best and is third. The difference is just two games out of the 450 out of division games in the last 15 years. The point is that the other three teams in the AFCE have only a 6% less win rate over 10 years than the average for the entire league and that is gigantically pertinent. There is no way that can be construed as "weak". 6% is one lousy win less a year than the league as a whole. Of course comparing the non-division winners would be even less of a gap or more wins because the league total will include all the winningest teams as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 22:57:14 GMT -5
All attempts along these lines, such as trying to make the AFCE seem weak when the numbers show that isn't a significant factor, come from the innate human urge to somehow explain why the Pats have dominated so very much for so long without admitting they are simply superior. It comes from the same dark place that the cheater accusations come from. Some cannot just admit that Brady along with a great coach and owner have made monkeys out of the best football people the world has been able to muster against them for a decade and a half.
The fact is, they are simply that much better at this than everybody else and it doesn't have shit to do with the division's weakness, cheating or any other damned thing than they just do it better.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 23:10:51 GMT -5
Has anybody else noticed that the top winning teams over the last decade is just about the same list as the top rated QBs over that time?
The top win teams overt the last 10 years: Pats, Pack, Steelers, Colts, Broncos, Cowboys, Saints, Ravens, Seahawks, Falcons, Giants and Cards.
Respective QBs: Brady, Rodgers, BR, Manning/Luck, (Broncos are an outlier), Romo, Brees, Flacco, Wilson, Ryan, Eli and Palmer. The other outlier is Rivers for the Chargers at 15.
That's a pretty good list of the best QBs in descending order over the decade. QB is a real big deal in today's NFL.
|
|
donholman
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 429
Likes: 151
|
Post by donholman on Dec 9, 2017 23:34:43 GMT -5
All attempts along these lines, such as trying to make the AFCE seem weak when the numbers show that isn't a significant factor, come from the innate human urge to somehow explain why the Pats have dominated so very much for so long without admitting they are simply superior. Spot on. Human beings are inference machines. Give us 3 pieces of information, and we have the ability to imagine/study/predict why these 3 pieces of information might point to a larger reason why all three are true. TFB has assumed that W-L records are the best way of measuring the strength of teams. Furthermore, assuming his data is correct, the other 3 AFC East teams have since 2001 or 2 or whatever, have underperformed against all other AFC teams by about 6% a year. This may not even be a statistically significant amount, but assuming it is, what TFB has not corrected for, because it's impossible to do except subjectively, is to imagine/study/predict what the effect is on these 3 teams given the fact that they play in the same division as the Pats. In other words, what if their under-performance results from playing the same division as the Pats??? Here's a few subjective reasons why that might be true: 1) Other teams (non-AFCE) get to watch two games a year of your offense and defense being checkmated, if not destroyed, by Belichick. 2) You go into every season with 2 semi-guaranteed losses on the calendar. 3) You make beating the Pats at least once a year an overly important event, causing you to suffer let-downs when you lose. 4) Failing to break through leads to chronic coach-shuffling, player-movement, and general organizational heartburn. 5) Not to mention your fan base doesn't take you seriously, which even for professionals is disheartening. It sucks to lose and it sucks to be second-best - the lack of hope is like a lack of oxygen for a sports team. 6) If you were a good coach or player and had a choice, why would you choose AFCE? It's a very poor road to the SB. I'm sure there's lots more.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Dec 9, 2017 23:52:56 GMT -5
Ko Still love the word "lucky" 20 pages predicted on top of the 20 pages on lucky thread last year... Lol. "Like the legend of the phoenix All ends with beginnings What keeps the planet spinning (uh) The force of love beginning We've come too far to give up who we are So let's raise the bar and our cups to the stars She's up all night 'til the sun I'm up all night to get some She's up all night for good fun I'm up all night to get lucky" daft punk. "get lucky" (verse 1) Still love the word"lucky"... Lol. Page7-8 going on 20... Lucky is important word for agenda members of board. Lucky implies its all Brady. The lucky pick , the lucky division he dominates, the lucky Belichick.. Lol. This board is lucky too. It is lucky to have the Coolades wozziss, crazytroys, slgdevs and others that stand up to this agenda driven segment who would otherwise run the board unchecked into kooky fantasyland.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Dec 10, 2017 0:04:58 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. excellent post... Ok now we move on to next "lucky" item... Lol.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Dec 10, 2017 0:18:33 GMT -5
Basically... The AFC east looks weaker because patriots are IN IT. . So obvious. The teams are no worse than other divisions, maybe even better than most , they are just beaten down every year. So patriots are " lucky" they are so good.. Lol. Really . This topic is so overblown it's stupid to bring it up. But there's no shortage of stupid out there and around here too... Lol. Can you not read?? You post totally shows that you haven’t read a single post in here. The Packers have been to just as many playoffs in 10 years as the Patriots have yet the other teams in the NFC North have been to the playoffs twice as many times as the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The Steelers have been to the playoffs 2 times less than the Pats have in 10 years yet the rest of the division has been to the playoffs 12 times... compared to just 4 times for the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. So your comment is total bullshit. Again you are the " jump to dumb conclusions " KING.!! Exactly like your stupid 2 game partial correlation of yards in Monday observations thread ... Here you cherry picky a couple divisions to try and prove a broader point..! AND you claim my post is BULLSHIT ....! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. This is too good. Please don't change. lol. This is fun.!!
|
|
donholman
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 429
Likes: 151
|
Post by donholman on Dec 10, 2017 0:35:29 GMT -5
Can you not read?? You post totally shows that you haven’t read a single post in here. The Packers have been to just as many playoffs in 10 years as the Patriots have yet the other teams in the NFC North have been to the playoffs twice as many times as the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The Steelers have been to the playoffs 2 times less than the Pats have in 10 years yet the rest of the division has been to the playoffs 12 times... compared to just 4 times for the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. So your comment is total bullshit. Again you are the " jump to dumb conclusions " KING.!! Exactly like your stupid 2 game partial correlation of yards in Monday observations thread ... Here you cherry picky a couple divisions to try and prove a broader point..! AND you're too stupid to realize it....! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. I'm going to pee my pants. Please don't change. lol. This is fun.!! TFB, you totally miss the point. The Pats are not the Packers and they are not the Steelers. Both the Packers and Steelers have had plenty of yuck seasons since 2001. The Pats are a historically great team that has had non-stop success for almost 17 years. You cannot say that about any other team. The Pats would wreak the same havoc in whichever division they played in (see my post a couple back as to why). They are, for the lack of a better phrase, "sui generis". That's pronounced, "cut the crap, we're on to Miami."
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 3:36:13 GMT -5
Can you not read?? You post totally shows that you haven’t read a single post in here. The Packers have been to just as many playoffs in 10 years as the Patriots have yet the other teams in the NFC North have been to the playoffs twice as many times as the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The Steelers have been to the playoffs 2 times less than the Pats have in 10 years yet the rest of the division has been to the playoffs 12 times... compared to just 4 times for the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. So your comment is total bullshit. Again you are the " jump to dumb conclusions " KING.!! Exactly like your stupid 2 game partial correlation of yards in Monday observations thread ... Here you cherry picky a couple divisions to try and prove a broader point..! AND you claim my post is BULLSHIT ....! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. This is too good. Please don't change. lol. This is fun.!! All you do is insult people here, you add nothing of substance to the forum and you are a complete liar. You have been busted several times lying about watching the games. We all know you do not watch the games you say you watch, you post on here acting like you did watch the games. You have insulted people who posted their opinions on the games, yet you never even watched them. You are a fraud and a liar. I have already called you out on this, I even posted screen shots of the remarks that you made insulting others opinion about the games that you never even watched. I guess that makes you the "fraud" KING and the "liar" KING. I cherry pick a couple of divisions? LMAO!! I posted results of each and every division over the last 10 season. Why don't you just continue to post pictures and stories of you mail order bride trip? It's been hilarious to follow.. especially when you start bragging about lame ass shit that actually makes you sound like the 40 year old virgin that you are. At least it's been entertaining, unlike your other worthless posts here. BTW, have you figured out yet the difference between an A cup and a C cup? That was hilarious! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. this is too good. Please don't change. lol. This is fun!!
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 3:44:25 GMT -5
Again you are the " jump to dumb conclusions " KING.!! Exactly like your stupid 2 game partial correlation of yards in Monday observations thread ... Here you cherry picky a couple divisions to try and prove a broader point..! AND you're too stupid to realize it....! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. I'm going to pee my pants. Please don't change. lol. This is fun.!! TFB, you totally miss the point. The Pats are not the Packers and they are not the Steelers. Both the Packers and Steelers have had plenty of yuck seasons since 2001. The Pats are a historically great team that has had non-stop success for almost 17 years. You cannot say that about any other team. The Pats would wreak the same havoc in whichever division they played in (see my post a couple back as to why). They are, for the lack of a better phrase, "sui generis". That's pronounced, "cut the crap, we're on to Miami." No, you totally miss the point. You seem to have got butthurt for me pointing out the rest of the AFC East is weak and the Pats play in a weak division. I'm not taking away any of the accomplishment the Pats have achieved, I'm not putting down the Pats at all. All I'm saying and pointing out is that the rest of the AFC East is weak. That's it. It's not the Pats fault, they didn't make up the divisions, and I'm not doubting that they would wreak the same havoc if they were in another division. I have even stated several times thatthey would still dominate the league if they were in another division. It seems that people (you included) get so butthurt about me claiming the rest of the AFC East division is weak compared to other divisions that they (you included) don't read the rest of the posts, instead they (you included) rush to post a message that has already been covered multiple times. I suggest you go back and read the posts that you apparently skipped over.
|
|
|
Post by texaspat on Dec 10, 2017 3:46:57 GMT -5
Again you are the " jump to dumb conclusions " KING.!! Exactly like your stupid 2 game partial correlation of yards in Monday observations thread ... Here you cherry picky a couple divisions to try and prove a broader point..! AND you're too stupid to realize it....! ROFLMAO... MY GOD.. I'm going to pee my pants. Please don't change. lol. This is fun.!! TFB, you totally miss the point. The Pats are not the Packers and they are not the Steelers. Both the Packers and Steelers have had plenty of yuck seasons since 2001. The Pats are a historically great team that has had non-stop success for almost 17 years. You cannot say that about any other team. The Pats would wreak the same havoc in whichever division they played in (see my post a couple back as to why). They are, for the lack of a better phrase, "sui generis". That's pronounced, "cut the crap, we're on to Miami." I haven't bothered to read all the posts here, but is someone standing by an argument that the Patriots wouldn't have dominated the NFC North, in the same way that they've dominated the AFC East?? Is somebody really taking the position that the Patriots wouldn't have run roughshod over the Bears, Lions, and Vikings over the past 15 years, in the same manner that they have over the Dolphins, Jets, and Bills?? Stop it!! LOL!! Furthermore, it's high time for the same person that's making this silly argument to stop referring to other posters here as stupid, and to stop engaging in personal attacks, in general. Finally, let's stop dealing in generalities, and separate the wheat from the shaft. To whomever it is who is arguing that the Patriots have had a such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East, please name the specific divisions which you think were better? At that point, perhaps we can then engage in a more fruitful analysis, and discussion.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 4:05:39 GMT -5
TFB, you totally miss the point. The Pats are not the Packers and they are not the Steelers. Both the Packers and Steelers have had plenty of yuck seasons since 2001. The Pats are a historically great team that has had non-stop success for almost 17 years. You cannot say that about any other team. The Pats would wreak the same havoc in whichever division they played in (see my post a couple back as to why). They are, for the lack of a better phrase, "sui generis". That's pronounced, "cut the crap, we're on to Miami." I haven't bothered to read all the posts here, but is someone standing by an argument that the Patriots wouldn't have dominated the NFC North, in the same way that they've dominated the AFC East?? Is somebody really taking the position that the Patriots wouldn't have run roughshod over the Bears, Lions, and Vikings over the past 15 years, in the same manner that they have over the Dolphins, Jets, and Bills?? Stop it!! LOL!! Furthermore, it's high time for the same person that's making this silly argument to stop referring to other posters here as stupid, and to stop engaging in personal attacks, in general. Maybe you should bother to read all the posts here.. if you did you would know that nobody has made the claim that you and donholman are talking about. Furthermore, it's time for some of you to actually know what you are talking about before making silly comments. What else is silly is for you to comment about someone else's posts, you have had your share of personal attacks on here TP. Don't all of a sudden act like you have been the poster boy for being the perfect forum member, lol!!
|
|
|
Post by texaspat on Dec 10, 2017 4:36:50 GMT -5
I haven't bothered to read all the posts here, but is someone standing by an argument that the Patriots wouldn't have dominated the NFC North, in the same way that they've dominated the AFC East?? Is somebody really taking the position that the Patriots wouldn't have run roughshod over the Bears, Lions, and Vikings over the past 15 years, in the same manner that they have over the Dolphins, Jets, and Bills?? Stop it!! LOL!! Furthermore, it's high time for the same person that's making this silly argument to stop referring to other posters here as stupid, and to stop engaging in personal attacks, in general. Maybe you should bother to read all the posts here.. if you did you would know that nobody has made the claim that you and donholman are talking about. Furthermore, it's time for some of you to actually know what you are talking about before making silly comments. What else is silly is for you to comment about someone else's posts, you have had your share of personal attacks on here TP. Don't all of a sudden act like you have been the poster boy for being the perfect forum member, lol!! I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 4:41:37 GMT -5
Maybe you should bother to read all the posts here.. if you did you would know that nobody has made the claim that you and donholman are talking about. Furthermore, it's time for some of you to actually know what you are talking about before making silly comments. What else is silly is for you to comment about someone else's posts, you have had your share of personal attacks on here TP. Don't all of a sudden act like you have been the poster boy for being the perfect forum member, lol!! I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum. Why don't you save us both the time of rehashing it and just go back a few pages and do some reading. feel free to ask questions, but please, don't continue to ask the same ones that have been asked over and over again. It seems like when discussions like this happen, people jump in half way through and ask questions and make comments that have been asked and made dozens of times already because they are too lazy to just go back and do some reading.
|
|
|
Post by texaspat on Dec 10, 2017 5:09:12 GMT -5
I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum. Why don't you save us both the time of rehashing it and just go back a few pages and do some reading. feel free to ask questions, but please, don't continue to ask the same ones that have been asked over and over again. It seems like when discussions like this happen, people jump in half way through and ask questions and make comments that have been asked and made dozens of times already because they are too lazy to just go back and do some reading. Stop it. All I've asked you to do is to list the divisions that you feel were so much better than the AFC East. But, if you care to move on instead of answering this seemingly simple request, fine. TFB, I have a second question. Why the hell are you and I up at this hour?? LOL!!
|
|