if that is hyperbole, so is yours because it is just as speculative and thus potentially just as much an exaggeration. obviously they were looking to trade him, but I can't help but think the fact that they demolished the Fins without him having a catch made them feel more confident in their ability to succeed without him, and I also can't help but be reminded of Don Nelson trading Chris Webber when he was holding out because they got off to an 8-1 start or something, only to see them not be able to continue that success without Webber. The Pats can't honestly believe they are as good today without Moss as they were with him, and they honestly can't believe that being not as good still makes them the best team in the NFL, so why would they honestly make the team worse this year and not a legitimate contender just for a third round pick? or maybe they were fooled by the success of their special teams victory and projected that onto their ability to succeed on offense without Moss. either way, it benefits the Jets, so I am good.
Yeah but Favre isn't Brady. He will throw up a lot of ducks trying to get the ball to Moss. I expect lots of Ints.
I think Moss was becoming too much of a distraction for NE. they were forced to move him. They don't believe they are better, thats just fodder for the Pats dick sucking media to use as their excuse. Their offense is going to take a serious hit. I think they are gonna utilize the running game more, which gives the edge to us. Welker isn't going to beat anyone deep and tate is unproven. I worry that they will flip thos picks into V Jax, but I think the Moss debacle will sway them away from doing that as well. So I agree it is a win for the Jets.
I don't think in any way it is an exaggeration to say they still have a very good offense. I never said it would be better, because Moss IS one of the top 5 or 5 WR's in football. The only positive would be that Brady won't be forcing passes to Moss to keep him happy, and he is at his best when he is just hitting the open receiver. As far as the 3rd round pick, it is about as good as they could get since Moss isn't signing an extension, so he's a rental. And defensively, if they don't play better, they aren't a SB contender with or without Moss.
Vincent Jackson just doesn't make sense. one, we already know what SD wants for him, and if Minnesota, who was desperate for a WR, wouldn't give it up, why would NE? secondly, Jackson wants to get paid. not a little. a lot. and NE doesn't have a history of paying WR's, so again they would just be trading for a half season rental, which isn't their MO either.
They can always re-sign him if they want. Or work out an agreeable one year contract for the next year and go from there. They will have options.
it certainly is as good as they would get, but it makes them worse, which either means they still think they are good enough to win the Super Bowl despite not being as good, are completely deluded by their victory the other night and believe they are just as good without him, or are willing to accept not winning the Super Bowl this season, which isn't what the players probably want to believe.
and look at them this year. considering the game will be played this season, that seems certainly more applicable than last years statistics. kind of the same way Sanchez is judged now for not throwing interceptions despite how he performed last year.
New England swindles a 3rd round pick out of Minnesota for one of the top 10 receivers in the NFL? Belichick you evil genius!! I get it now. I get why New England and Oakland always seem to do lopsided deals. Bill Belichick and Al Davis both enjoy a good rogering now and then.
My Worst Fear I'm scared he just got traded to the vikes (OUR NEXT OPPONET BTW) and he gonna have new life he will light us up and I'm afraid he'll hurt Revis' hammy again. With a Run game like the vikes it opens Randy like nobodys business.
As one of the above pointed out... He'd have probably held out for a 2, if Minny was not playing us this week.
fuck. how stupid do you have to be to not understand how message boards function? there are threads about topics, you post your opinion/argument/position in regards to said topic in those threads about topics, you don't start a new thread for every opinion you have.
