I hope the Pats beat the ever living sh*t

[Nzoner]

out of the J-E-T-S this Sunday.

Hey Rex and gang when you finally sport some hardware,then run your mouth if you must.


Rex Ryan offers no apology for Cromartie's comments on Brady

cromartie_0112.jpgFOXBORO -- Jets coach Rex Ryan just finished his conference call with the New England media and offered no apologizes for his cornerback Antonio Cromartie, who in an interview with the New York Daily News used a crude slur to label Tom Brady.

"We're not apologizing for anything," said Ryan. "Did we vote [Brady] to be the starting quarterback in the Pro Bowl? Yes we did. Did we vote him for the NFL Player of the Year? Yeah we did, so there's plenty of respect but we don't have to be all lovey dovey and say, 'Oh he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.' We have a right to our opinion and a comment like that, it's no big deal. A guy makes a comment, big deal."

Unlike Bill Belichick, who doesn't like his players giving bulletin board material to opposing teams, Ryan doesn't have a problem with it.

"In this country you're allowed to have opinions and all that kind of stuff," Ryan said. "Obviously as an organization we respect Tom Brady, there's no question about it. But hey, is there dislike between us and Brady, and Brady against the Jets? Of course there is. Am I going to punish Cromartie for saying something or whatever? No. I know one thing, we respect New England but we don't fear them. A comment like that, it just [shows] that they're the enemy."

In the Daily News article, Cromartie said that the Jets took exception when Brady threw a fourth-quarter touchdown and pointed to the Jets sidelines during the Patriots 45-3 win in Week 13.

"We see that a lot. He does that a lot," said Cromartie. "That's the kind of guy he is. We really don't give a damn, to tell you the truth."

Cromartie said that he "hates" both Brady and the Patriots.

"Everything is personal with me and the Patriots," said Cromartie, who was a rookie with San Diego when the Patriots overcame a 21-13 fourth-quarter deficit to beat the Chargers, 24-21, in the Divisional round of the playoffs in 2006. "So I really don't care. I don't have too much to say about them. I'm just ready to play ball on Sunday."

Cromartie also gave a little hint for Sunday's game plan on how to stop Brady and his receivers.

"If I beat the (expletive) out of his receivers, he can't throw the ball," Cromartie said.
When asked if that was indeed the Jets game plan, Ryan said that the Jets players didn't get the game plan until today.

Ryan is a trash-talking coach and his players follow his lead.

"I think maybe they do follow my lead in the fact that, you know what, we can say what's on our mind or whatever," said Ryan. "I don't say whatever we do don't say this or don't say that. We're a transparent organization. We let our guys speak and we don't try to tell them what to say and what not to say."

_________________________________________________________________
BRADY's RESPONSE...I love the last paragraph


Much like his coach, Patriots quarterback Tom Brady isn't about to get into a war of words with anyone on the Jets this week.

Brady spoke to the large media assembly at his locker this morning and was asked if he had any response to the obscenity-laced comments made about him by Jets cornerback Antonio Cromartie.

"I've been called worse," Brady said when informed that Cromartie called him an [expletive]. "I'm sure there's a long list of people that feel that way but he's a good player, [Darrelle] Revis is a great player. They've got a great secondary. They're one of the best defenses we face. We're going to spend a lot of time preparing for them.

"What they're capable of doing over there, shutting down the Colts offense like they did, was pretty impressive because we know how good that offense is, but we're going to get ready to play."

Brady was also asked about pointing at the sidelines after big plays and other so-called "antics" as described by Jets coach Rex Ryan earlier in the week.

"I'm an emotional player, so it's all in the spirit of the game and the competition," Brady said. "I don't know [if there's anything to Ryan's observations], he can probably answer that better than I could."

Brady was asked if it was a little more fun to face a team where there is strong dislike on both sides.

"Is it more fun? It's always more satisfying to win," Brady said. "Especially in games like this, not that you need more satisfaction to win in a game like this because it's the biggest game we played all season and I'm always satisfied when we win. I think there's certainly big games that we had against them. The last game at home was a very big game, that was very satisfying, so this one will be satisfying also if we win."

Regarding all the talk coming out of Jets camp this week, Brady wasn't fazed in the least.

"We're spending our time getting ready to play," Brady said. "I don't think we're spending our time figuring out what we can do to combat what people may say about us. Not everybody has great things to say about our team, or our organization, or certain players. And that's kind of the way it's always been so... we're just going to do our talking on the field. I think that's what we've always chosen to do."

Brady said the outcome of Sunday's game will determine if all the talk had any effect.

We'll see," he said. "We'll see on Sunday afternoon at 7:30 p.m. That's when everybody will be able to tell whether it played a role or not. We'll have to wait and see."

The Patriots quarterback was also asked about comments made earlier in the week by Ryan that questioned Brady's commitment to studying the game.

"I do what my coach asks me to do and however he feels I need to prepare, he'll let me know," Brady said. "We try to win games, you know? Look at what we've accomplished over 10 years and I think that speaks to the whole preparation of our team. That's why we play, we play to win games more so than anything else. You're not trying to do anything other than win. The goal of playing football is to win, every time you take the field, score more points than the other team, however you need to get that done, that's what you need to do..."

"We don't engage in it very often," Brady said about all the pregame talk. "Every once in a while maybe someone will say something, but for the most part our team has just stayed the course, spend our time preparing for the other team... We can sit here and say a whole bunch of things, too, but I think we realize it's really not the point of what this team's all about, what this organization's all about, all the way from the owner of our team, to the head coach of our team, and that trickles down to the players.

"Now other teams may have a different view or perspective of how they want to handle things. When you're representative of the organization like the Patriot team is, that's how we try to conduct ourselves."

[Dylan]

Amnorix, What about GB or Chicago's defense?

Just curious - TIA

[Dylan]

Spagnuolo's great moments as a leader:

New York Daily News

Mythbuster: Did '07 Giants really go all-out in finale vs. unbeaten Pats?
BY Ralph Vacchiano

January 14, 2011 10:54 AM

The Giants’ pass rush overwhelmed Tom Brady in Super Bowl XLII. They came at him from every angle and attacked him from the opening series right up until the last. It was a clinic, really, on how to stop the mighty Patriots and what to do to knock their Hall of Fame-bound quarterback off his game.

What I never was able to understand about that, though, was why the Giants chose to play Brady that way that night, and why all week before the game the Giants seemed so sure they’d be able to rattle him. Five weeks earlier, in what appeared to be an all-out effort to stop the Patriots from finishing the regular season unbeaten, the Giants’ pass rush was completely ineffective. They sacked Brady only once and watched him stand in the pocket, mostly untouched, completing 32 of 42 passes for 356 yards.

So after looking at that film of the regular season finale, what in the world made then-defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo think his defense could get to Brady the second time around?

“Well, I’ll let you in on a little bit of a secret,” Spagnuolo, now the Rams head coach, said from his office in St. Louis this week. “You know, as much as we wanted to win that game - - all of us did - - and we played it to win it, we made a decision defensively we weren’t going to jeopardize trying to win the Tampa Bay game (in the first round of the playoffs) by throwing out our whole game plan in the 16th game of the season. So there was a little bit of a pullback there.”

That certainly has been a well-kept secret, considering the Giants’ supposed, all-out effort against the then-15-0 Patriots is often credited as the performance that sparked their Super Bowl run. They lost 38-35 that day, but picked up tons of confidence, even though their defense barely provided a speed bump for Brady and the Patriots’ record-setting offensive machine.

The Giants did play their starters until the very end of that mostly meaningless game, risking their health just eight days before they’d open the playoffs at Tampa Bay. The players, in fact, were told they were going all-out for the win, and they may not have even realized how scaled back the defensive game plan really was.

It was scaled back enough, however, that Spagnuolo regretted the decision after he saw how close the Giants were to actually pulling that upset off.

“I remember as close as we got to winning that game I felt a little bit bad about not throwing a little bit more at them in an attempt to win the thing,” Spagnuolo said. “They were better than us that day and they should have won. But we did some different things in the Super Bowl that we didn’t do at all in the 16th game.

“I don’t know if that helped or not, but we’d like to think it did.”

Whether it did or not, I certainly found that “little secret” interesting when I spoke to Spagnuolo this week for an article that appeared in the Daily News special section on the upcoming Jets-Patriots playoff game. Mostly, I talked with “Spags” about how to attack a Brady-Belichick team. But we also spent some time reminiscing about that magical Giants Super Bowl run.

Not surprisingly, Spagnuolo said the scheme didn’t have nearly as much to do with the Giants’ big upset as did the “good players and great leadership” that memorable team had.

“It’s funny, I’ll go back down memory lane for you,” Spagnuolo said. “I remember being at our team hotel. It might have been before Game 5. We were 2-2, we had just won a couple of games, and I remember saying to the defense ‘How many guys in here have been to the playoffs?’ A number of guys put their hands up. ‘How many guys have been in a Super Bowl?’ I put mine up, Michael Strahan put his up and Peter Giunta put his up. I’m not sure, there might have been (others). But there weren’t very many hands. I said to Pete and Mike, ‘Did you ever get to the Super Bowl by winning one or two games?’ Of course the answer was ‘No.’ The point was there was a lot of work to be done.

“But I remember when I went through that exercise that there weren’t a lot of hands up for playoffs or Super Bowl, but the key ones were up there. There were some coaches that had been there, Strahan had been there. Antonio Pierce had been to the playoffs. Sam Madison had been to the playoffs. And I do think that carried us when we went in as a 10-6 wild card team with really no expectations from anybody outside our building and helped us eventually win the thing.”

It also helped, he said, that the Giants gained some confidence with their near-win in the regular-season finale. It doesn’t matter how scaled back the game plan was. The key players in Super Bowl XLII were in there until the end and left the field convinced they’d beat the Patriots if they were fortunate enough to play them again.

“I remember Justin Tuck and I walking off the field and he said, ‘Coach, I sure do hope we get a chance to play them again,’” Spagnuolo recalled. “That’s just the way he felt and I thought it permeated through the team. And when we did get a chance, our guys as players took advantage of it.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/gia...-unbeaten-pats

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Dylan

Amnorix, What about GB or Chicago's defense?

Just curious - TIA

Chicago's defense the Pats pummeled last month, BUT BUT BUT that was on a completely crappy Soldier's Field turf. I think Chicago defensively could pose problems for the Patriots with some seriously elite players in Peppers, Uhrlacher (sp?) and Briggs. Their field hurt htem that game. Urlacher also tipped like 2 balls himself, and there were some opportunities for picks that, luck being what it is, didn't go Chicago's way.

The question there is whether their offense can do much. I'm not in a good position to assess that. Certainly Cutler looked terrible against us that game.

The Packers scare me more than any NFC team in a potential Super Bowl matchup. Rodgers is 90% of Brady, and their pass rush can be ferocious.

They also lost a very close game IN FOXBORO to us, without Rodgers, which is a similar scenario to 2007 when the Giants lost a very close game to us in the last regular game of the season, therefore entering hte Super Bowl with no fear at all of the Patriots, and having a good sense of how they play and what might be necessary to defeat them.

Seattle doesn't scare me (doesn't matter, they'll never get there) and Atlanta, for some reason, really doesn't scare me that much. I like Ryan, but more than likely it's a function of not knowing that team very well. But I know their 13-3 record is a bit inflated for having had the NFC West in their rotation this year.

But let me be honest -- I think the Patriots, STeelers AND Ravens are better than ANY NFC team. If we can get to the Super Bowl, I still *expect* to win. That doesn't mean we will, of course. 2007 was ample proof that what is expected, or even what might happen 8 times out of 10, can always go wrong.

2001 went that way in the Patriots favor, of course. 2007 was seeing the worm turn in that respect.

[2112]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Jets don't have the same kind of defensive line.

The Jets have absolutely no pass rush without blitzing. I think they are gonna play smith again at linebacker and dare the Pats to run the ball. which isnt exactly their game.

[Dylan]

Thank you, Amnorix

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by D2112

The Jets have absolutely no pass rush without blitzing. I think they are gonna play smith again at linebacker and dare the Pats to run the ball. which isnt exactly their game.

Right, and I think blitzing Brady isn't much different from slitting your wrists with a chainsaw.

What the Giants did wsa without blitzing, which was the key to why it worked so well. Frankly, I was shocked -- not because I didn't know the Giants were that good, but because they dominated the Patriots OLine, which had not been manhandled like that -- or anything close to it, all year.

The Giants D-Line's domination of the Pats O-Line is why the Giants won that game, pure and simple.

[007]

Originally Posted by Nzoner

Sorry man,I did,but I have a few fires raging in my life right now so I didn't want to commit to anything and then have to cancel.I should know more by early next week if that's not too late.

Thats fine man. Just let me know.

[beach tribe]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Right, and I think blitzing Brady isn't much different from slitting your wrists with a chainsaw.

What the Giants did wsa without blitzing, which was the key to why it worked so well. Frankly, I was shocked -- not because I didn't know the Giants were that good, but because they dominated the Patriots OLine, which had not been manhandled like that -- or anything close to it, all year.

The Giants D-Line's domination of the Pats O-Line is why the Giants won that game, pure and simple.

Yup.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Dylan

Hey JD10367, This one's for you -- Hot off the press!

I give zero shit about what Suggs thinks, just as I give zero shit what you think.

This one's for you, AND Suggs.

[007]

Damnit, boy scouts is having their damn pinewood derby tomorrow at 2pm. I'm gonna end up missing most of the game I wanted to see tomorrow. ugh

I don't like boy scouts. My son doesn't like it. My wife makes him do it. I always end up making the car because he wasn't much help.

I really can't stand scouts and the pinewood derbys.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Right, and I think blitzing Brady isn't much different from slitting your wrists with a chainsaw.

What the Giants did wsa without blitzing, which was the key to why it worked so well. Frankly, I was shocked -- not because I didn't know the Giants were that good, but because they dominated the Patriots OLine, which had not been manhandled like that -- or anything close to it, all year.

The Giants D-Line's domination of the Pats O-Line is why the Giants won that game, pure and simple.

I also think that game demonstrated the first chink in the armor as to why Randy Moss wasn't such a great idea after all.

Also, note that in the second half of that season the Patriots actually started playing poorer (having closer games) and entered the playoffs not getting better. Despite being 16-0, I think this Patriots team was actually playing better ball--and continuously improving ball--as the season came to an end.

[LiveSteam]

That was as close to a perfect season as i think we will ever live to see. 1 dam pass play on 4th down. For me?. I would give away the other 3 super bowl wins for that 1 perfect season,& the right to shove it down dolphin throats for ever more.
CAN WE PLEASE GO BACK IN TIME & REDO THAT 1 PLAY? pleassssssssssssssss!!
The pain of that game. Dose not get better with time.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Chicago's defense the Pats pummeled last month, BUT BUT BUT that was on a completely crappy Soldier's Field turf. I think Chicago defensively could pose problems for the Patriots with some seriously elite players in Peppers, Uhrlacher (sp?) and Briggs. Their field hurt htem that game. Urlacher also tipped like 2 balls himself, and there were some opportunities for picks that, luck being what it is, didn't go Chicago's way.

The question there is whether their offense can do much. I'm not in a good position to assess that. Certainly Cutler looked terrible against us that game.

The Packers scare me more than any NFC team in a potential Super Bowl matchup. Rodgers is 90% of Brady, and their pass rush can be ferocious.

They also lost a very close game IN FOXBORO to us, without Rodgers, which is a similar scenario to 2007 when the Giants lost a very close game to us in the last regular game of the season, therefore entering hte Super Bowl with no fear at all of the Patriots, and having a good sense of how they play and what might be necessary to defeat them.

Seattle doesn't scare me (doesn't matter, they'll never get there) and Atlanta, for some reason, really doesn't scare me that much. I like Ryan, but more than likely it's a function of not knowing that team very well. But I know their 13-3 record is a bit inflated for having had the NFC West in their rotation this year.

I'd agree with that assessment.

It's really not rocket science as to how to beat this version of the Patriots. For the Jets (or anyone) to do it, they have to:

1.) Run the ball effectively, controlling the time of possession and keeping Brady off the field.

2.) Pressure Brady (preferably by concealing the alignment and eliminating many pre-snap reads on his part). IMO the best way to do this is the same way the Patriots D used to do it back around '03/'04: move around a lot before the snap of the ball. I don't know why more teams don't do this to Brady and Peyton. Have guys in three point stances, who back up into two; have guys approach the line as if blitzing, then shuffle back a few feet as if going into pass-protection, then go back towards the LOS. If Brady and Manning don't know what you're doing, then they can't audible out to a call they think will work.

3.) Try to get off the field defensively on third down. Brady and the Patriots are very good at 3DC, usually getting just enough yardage. Keep an eye on Welker and Woodhead, and defend the seams against the tight ends.

4.) Win the turnover battle.

5.) Do the unexpected. Against a team like the Patriots, any small edge can be the difference in the game. Despite Belichick's big brain, he IS susceptible to coaches who go against the grain (witness the onside kick to start the game a few weeks back, which caught the Patriots flatfooted). Especially if you're a team that's not on equal footing (hi Jets), you're not going to win by playing it safe. I haven't seen a nice fake FG attempt lately; if I were the Jets, and I was in the 47-50 yard range, I'd fake one.

6.) Take advantage of whatever weaknesses the team has. In this year's team, it's pretty simple: the defensive line depth and the defensive backfield depth. Creative run plays against the former, and multiple-receiver formations against the latter, with three-step drops and even max protect if necessary.

The problem is that the Patriots are very disciplined and it's hard to accomplish these things. Especially for a team like the Jets, who don't have a franchise QB. If Sanchez has even an average game, they're in a lot of trouble; if he has a bad game, they're toast.

Ultimately, here's the rub for the Jets: they have this long laundry-list of "things they need to do to beat the Patriots". On the other side, the Patriots have a much shorter list of "things they need to do to beat the Jets":

1.) Execute on offense as you've been doing all year, and don't **** up.

2.) Play at least a bend-but-don't-break defense as you've been doing all year, and don't **** up.

[Dylan]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Right, and I think blitzing Brady isn't much different from slitting your wrists with a chainsaw.

What the Giants did wsa without blitzing, which was the key to why it worked so well. Frankly, I was shocked -- not because I didn't know the Giants were that good, but because they dominated the Patriots OLine, which had not been manhandled like that -- or anything close to it, all year.

The Giants D-Line's domination of the Pats O-Line is why the Giants won that game, pure and simple.

Patriots is a very smart offense. Thinking back -- Tom Coughlin offered a simple explanation for how the Giants defense contained Brady's complex offense.

If you try to 'stack the box' that's when they throw. They use runs as passes -- They're going to come out with something new every game and work it into their basic scheme. If you try and play tight against the pass -- that's when they run. It just so happens that Spags had the ability to change and adapt in the game. He had a lot of set-ups to counter.

There are some teams that run the same offense all the time with some minor tweaks. If only it were that easy against the Patriots.

[Dylan]

Originally Posted by JD10367

I give zero shit about what Suggs thinks, just as I give zero shit what you think.

This one's for you, AND Suggs.

JD10367, do you live under a rock?