Patsies....

[JasonKGME]

I keep hearing about how our team can't go 10-6 and we must be drinking Cardinal Kool-Aid. My question is if the Patsies can go from 5-11 to winning the super bowl all by picking up a bunch of mid-lower level free agents, then why can't we? Name me one player that we as a group were thinking to ourselves thats the player that will get NE to the next level.

Heck many of us were laughing at NEM because he was so happy about his team signing a bunch of no-names. Yet low and behold it was what NE needed, along with a rookie Qb that noone had heard of to get them over the hump.

Who's to say with the people we have signed and with a good draft and a couple more signings that we can't do the same?

 

[mdamien13]

Amen to that one.

 

[SECTION 11]

Yeah baby!!

 

[Ryanwb]

Yeah, but screw NEM

 

[Skkorpion]

Bill Belichik has a long history of being a defensive genius. QB Tom Brady helped that team win but the defense was dominant for the last half of the season.

We have Dave McGinnis, Larrie Marmie, and Joe Greene as our defensive "brain trust" and their track record is not good. Our defenses under McGinnis have a 7 year record of failure.

I like Dave McGinnis much more as a head coach than as a defensive coordinator. Dave is a motivator and the players like him.

It is my belief, however, that our defense will never amount to much under Marmie and Greene. So dreams of a Patriot-like season are not likely to become reality.

 

[Ed B]

Also, they went into that season with 2 WRs on the roster who had 1000 yard seasons under their belt, not 3 kids and a prayer like we have.

Nevertheless, we have more than enough talent on offense for this scenario to at least be plausible.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by JasonKGME
I keep hearing about how our team can't go 10-6 and we must be drinking Cardinal Kool-Aid. My question is if the Patsies can go from 5-11 to winning the super bowl all by picking up a bunch of mid-lower level free agents, then why can't we? Name me one player that we as a group were thinking to ourselves thats the player that will get NE to the next level.

Heck many of us were laughing at NEM because he was so happy about his team signing a bunch of no-names. Yet low and behold it was what NE needed, along with a rookie Qb that noone had heard of to get them over the hump.

Who's to say with the people we have signed and with a good draft and a couple more signings that we can't do the same?

The difference between the Pats of 2000 and the Cards of 2002 has to do less with record and more with margin of victory. The 2000 Pats went 5-11, yes, but their average loss margin was 8.27 points, and seven of those losses were by a touchdown or less, and there were two more losses by eight points. This is the kind of team that was like the 2001 Bears, but didn't get those breaks.

The 2002 Cards, on the other hand, and 11 losses with an average margin of 17.98 points, with seven double-digit losses and five of twenty-one points or more. This is the sign of a team that is in deep, deep trouble, espically on defense.

The 2000 Pats had dominant players in Drew Bledsoe and Terry Glenn on D, and Ty Law and Lawyer Malloy on D, along with a brillant coach in Bill Belichek.

The Cards have... a 34 year old emmit Smith and Jeff Blake on O, and... well, a bunch of guys that no one's ever heard of on D.

Last year was the year when the Cards were supposed to make a '99 Rams, '00 Ravens, '01 Pats-type run, from cellar to champion. That obviously didn't happen, and the team regressed. I'm not saying there's no hope for this team, but to expect a turnaround like any of those teams had is only setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[kerouac9]

Bump for Stronso

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by kerouac9
Bump for Stronso

Off topic, but what is a "bump"?

I've seen it used before, but I'm not familar with it's usage...

 

[SweetD]

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
Off topic, but what is a "bump"?

I've seen it used before, but I'm not familar with it's usage...

It is to bring treads back up to the top. Becouse there are so many going on sometimes a good thread will be lost a couple pages back.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
Off topic, but what is a "bump"?

I've seen it used before, but I'm not familar with it's usage...

Damnit, I want someone who thinks the Cards can have a winning record or should draft a CB to respond to this!

Anyway, "bump" refers to taking something that was lower on the list of "active" threads and bump them to the top so someone can see 'em.

 

[justAndy]

bump

"bump".... see, this thread goes back to the top of the page...

 

[BW52]

Re: Re: Patsies....

Originally posted by kerouac9
The difference between the Pats of 2000 and the Cards of 2002 has to do less with record and more with margin of victory. The 2000 Pats went 5-11, yes, but their average loss margin was 8.27 points, and seven of those losses were by a touchdown or less, and there were two more losses by eight points. This is the kind of team that was like the 2001 Bears, but didn't get those breaks.

The 2002 Cards, on the other hand, and 11 losses with an average margin of 17.98 points, with seven double-digit losses and five of twenty-one points or more. This is the sign of a team that is in deep, deep trouble, espically on defense.

The 2000 Pats had dominant players in Drew Bledsoe and Terry Glenn on D, and Ty Law and Lawyer Malloy on D, along with a brillant coach in Bill Belichek.

The Cards have... a 34 year old emmit Smith and Jeff Blake on O, and... well, a bunch of guys that no one's ever heard of on D.

Last year was the year when the Cards were supposed to make a '99 Rams, '00 Ravens, '01 Pats-type run, from cellar to champion. That obviously didn't happen, and the team regressed. I'm not saying there's no hope for this team, but to expect a turnaround like any of those teams had is only setting yourself up for disappointment.

Don`t you think that the large amount of injuries had something to do with the teams regression last season?Missing best CB for part of the season and best LB hurt the defense.The Cards are making progress and heading upward.New England had tremendous luck in 2001 with Brady playing as well as he did and the total NON Call versus the Raiders.If i recall corrwctly the Patsies were mostly injury free that season also.

 

[AzCards21]

Originally posted by kerouac9
Damnit, I want someone who thinks the Cards can have a winning record or should draft a CB to respond to this!

I think we will have a winning season 9-7 or 10-6. Your whole analysis based upon points scored for and against is apples and oranges. Yes we had some blow out losses (chefs) but there were several we were right in there. Considering the lack of experience of some of the players extreme up and downs are to be expected. Now they have that experience and it will pay off this year. Four games I felt were very winnable were Wash, San Diego, Seattle II and St. Louis II. Could the difference have been Blake instead of Jake, Hodgins instead of Mac, Ect.? Very possible.

Improvement has been made in several areas. I don't see your doom and gloom anywhere.

 

[pinnacle]

I cannot really comment on the comparison..FWIW - I do not think the cardinals are a playoff team..but I do think we have ugraded like 3 positions this offseason (fullback, safety, qb) and only downgraded one (Wide receiver)...but the offseason is not over and hopefully the cardinals can upgrade a few more positions. another plus is that when guys get injured going forward..it appears we will be relying on veterans as opposed to undrafted free agents (mostly rookies)..our depth seems alot better (except at receiver). In theory, the cardinals have gotten better - but it will be a month or two before we know how much.

I am very familiar with one player for the patriots..otis smith. I followed his career because there is not many mizzou players in the NFL from my era...and otis smith sucked pretty bad for the jets - and he was one of those mid level guys the patriots signed..and I think he still sucks.

 

[kerouac9]

Re: Re: Re: Patsies....

Originally posted by BW52
If i recall corrwctly the Patsies were mostly injury free that season also.

As I remember, they lost their starting QB for 8 weeks or something due to internal bleeding in week 2 or 3. Also, their #1 WR was down for most of the season. I can't remember if there were any injuries on the D (I'm sure that Krang does). With these injuries, they still managed to win their division and be the #1 seed in the AFC. Can you imagine what Cards fans would think if DB and Jake had gone down in Week 3? The stadium would have had 1500 fans every game. Regardless of a lucky call at the Snow Bowl, they still went to the AFC Championship game, and won it in OT. The first part has been enough for Eagle fans the past two years (the Eagles also lost their All-Pro QB last season and managed to get a bye).

Injuries happen to every team. It's a fact of the game. Some teams overcome them (the 2002 Packers, 1999 Rams) and some teams can't, and use that as an excuse (the 2002 Cardinals, Bears).

I'm not saying there's no hope for 2003, I'm just saying that the Cards aren't in any universe, going 10-6 this season. The most rosy perspective of the team as it stands now is only going 9-7, with the planets aligning.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Originally posted by AzCards21
I think we will have a winning season 9-7 or 10-6. Your whole analysis based upon points scored for and against is apples and oranges. Yes we had some blow out losses (chefs) but there were several we were right in there. Considering the lack of experience of some of the players extreme up and downs are to be expected. Now they have that experience and it will pay off this year. Four games I felt were very winnable were Wash, San Diego, Seattle II and St. Louis II. Could the difference have been Blake instead of Jake, Hodgins instead of Mac, Ect.? Very possible.

Improvement has been made in several areas. I don't see your doom and gloom anywhere.

As of now - still can't stop run - still can't rush the passer - which means AS OF NOW - our defense is just as freaking bad as last year. As far as offense - nothing has been added that will make this group better than last year at this point - give Blake a weapon or two and that's completely different -but right now we're looking at a team that has imporved their depth and could be in the right direction - but will be crap until the d-line and WR positions are addressed. Every other signing is secondary (besides Blake - but that one in my eyes is nullified because we have no experience at WR)