Has anybody seen Rusty?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    If crusty is anything, he is consistent.  he consistently posts, he consistently calls others trolls, he consistently questions whether other posters are multiple persons posting under a different name(he doesnt seem to care for others questioning him doing the same thing), he consistently calls others names. 

    now, if he is so darn consistent, why would he get banned now and not the first few thousand times he has done what he does?  the answer counselor is that he was not banned, he, in fact, deleted his account to hide his badness, not bad being good, just plain bad....
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Rusty - you are the biggestdouchebag of all time.  GTFO you pieceofshit.
    Posted by mighty2012[/QUOTE]


    Didn't take your meds yet today, eh Mighty? What is your obsession with always bashing Rusty? If you don't agree with him, ignore him. It's that simple. Whenever I have seen the two of you argue, you make posts such as the one I'm replying to while Rusty actually uses facts to base his argument. Just stop.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Not true. I saw brady not play well last January, handing off a win to your jets. So, I saw signs of this earlier this year. I posted about the incessant, embeded problem which is derived from our base shotgun offense. People didn';t like this because they want 40 points per game, fireworks with streaking WRs, and don't get that we can't win a SB like that. That's their problem. Brady and Offense had poor 1st halves prior to last week's game.  
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    This is just another knucklehead analysis from you.

    In the playoff loss last year....

    Sanchez, a 75 passer puts up Aaron Rodgers numbers (127).

    If you look at Sanchez doing that over a whole season he has:

    48 TD passes, tied for 3rd all-time. A 127.3 passer rating, the best of all-time. And zero INTs.

    But you blame Brady who gets sacked 5 times but still puts up a 90 as the culprit.

    As usual you are off in da da land on this.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In future, if you would be so kind, please refrain from using "quarterback rating" as a  measure of anything remotely related to football.

    The mathematics involved in the "quarterback rating" does not consider the sack in its metrics and place inordinate value on the incomplete pass.

    I don't have anything particular against mathemeticians, but stats are -- to be blunt -- bullpuckey.

    They can say whatever you want them to say . . .
     . . .  or not say whatever you don't want them to say.

    Stats are fake.

    Learn it.

    Live it.

    Lindsay Lohan  . . .


    ummm . . .   


    okay . . .   that doesn't make sense, but you have to at least give me some points for the alliteration.

    But stats are fake.

    For realsies.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    Correct me if I'm wrong but in Rusty's absence these Jets fans' posts were few and far between. The first day he's back they're already in a pis$ing match. In other news, anyone seen Ki11a post recently?

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Correct me if I'm wrong but in Rusty's absence these Jets fans' posts were few and far between. The first day he's back they're already in a pis$ing match. In other news, anyone seen Ki11a post recently?
    Posted by CaptainZdeno33[/QUOTE]

    Shirley you're not suggesting the Rusty spends all day, every day, talking to himself?



     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Right, which means my biting realistic premises about the recent or upcoming SB seasons for the Jets is why Wodat or other Jets trolls might focus on me. Deep down, he knows I am right, but he can't let it go/admit it. I am not a pissing match at all. He can't handle the reality.  Finally, he shouldn;t even be here with his combative history.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    See . . .

    Now, this is the kind of thing I'm always looking for.

    You better wipe your feet and blow your nose before you come in here, kids . . .  because you might not be able to handle the reality.

    This is Postie material, Russ.

    Well done.

    Wink

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Right, which means my biting realistic premises about the recent or upcoming SB seasons for the Jets is why Wodat or other Jets trolls might focus on me. Deep down, he knows I am right, but he can't let it go/admit it. I am not a pissing match at all. He can't handle the reality.  Finally, he shouldn;t even be here with his combative history.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    lolololol

    you are usually good for a good laugh.

    I focus on you?  More like I call out the bull sheeezy that gets spat out on this forum and if that means that I address you more, then now you know why. it is to expose you, not so much focus on you.  I dont come here to see what garbage is falling onto your keyboard today.

    You remember last year when you were ready to fit mccourtey with a HoF jacket?  You remember that? Tell me how that goes again?

    The highest of high comedy crusty. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    also, you throwing around the word "reality" is like a hookr throwing the word "abstinence" around.  it is just plain awkward...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rerun85. Show Rerun85's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    It took me a while to get through all these posts but this is absolutely the most entertaining thread I've read here in a while. This is why fans of other teams come to this site. There's no way you can get this kind of stuff anywhere else. Welcome back King.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]In future, if you would be so kind, please refrain from using "quarterback rating" as a  measure of anything remotely related to football. The mathematics involved in the "quarterback rating" does not consider the sack in its metrics and place inordinate value on the incomplete pass. I don't have anything particular against mathemeticians, but stats are -- to be blunt -- bullpuckey. They can say whatever you want them to say . . .  . . .  or not say whatever you don't want them to say. Stats are fake. Learn it. Live it. Lindsay Lohan  . . . ummm . . .    okay . . .   that doesn't make sense, but you have to at least give me some points for the alliteration. But stats are fake. For realsies.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]

    Nearly everybody alive has some problem with passer rating as a stat. So you're not breaking new ground here. But I'm sure one person's objection is another person's acceptable parameter. In fairness, it is a reasonable measure of a passer's effectiveness even if not a perfect one.

    As far as stats being fake, what should we go by instead? Your opinion? No thanks, I'll stick with the stats.


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Correct me if I'm wrong but in Rusty's absence these Jets fans' posts were few and far between. The first day he's back they're already in a pis$ing match. In other news, anyone seen Ki11a post recently?
    Posted by CaptainZdeno33[/QUOTE]


    Good point. He is a jet troll magnet because he is absurd. It's pretty lame when the jets' trolls have to actually defend the best player in Patriots' history against a so called Pats' fan.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from gmbill. Show gmbill's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    Let him rest a while, crying takes a lot out of a man
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Not true. I saw brady not play well last January, handing off a win to your jets. So, I saw signs of this earlier this year. I posted about the incessant, embeded problem which is derived from our base shotgun offense. People didn';t like this because they want 40 points per game, fireworks with streaking WRs, and don't get that we can't win a SB like that. That's their problem. Brady and Offense had poor 1st halves prior to last week's game.  
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    Welcome back Russ. This board was boring without you.

    I don't know if I can put a finger on the "why", but clearly the Pats offense was more than anemic during that playoff game last year against the Yets. We scored 3 total points in the 1st half of play, while giving up an interception for a long return, and then Chung's miffed fake punt. The interception set up the Jets 1st TD, and the fake punt, the Jets 2nd TD of the half. You got to think without those 2 plays which clearly put the Jests in relative easy scoring position, the outcome (even though Brady got sacked 5 times) may have been very different. 

    The D on the other hand, played well in spurts, but had horrendous 2nd and 4th quarters, in part, aided by those 2 key turnovers I noted above. Still, when the game came down to crunchtime, the D couldn't hold off the Jets when it really mattered and when we closed it by a TD very late in the game. 

    I know you are not a Brady hater, but if we take this playoff game and hold it up, it certainly appears to me that those 2 key turnovers, plus not putting any real points on the board in the 1st half is what did us in. The D as it was built, and as depleted as it was last year come playoff time, simply isn't built (maybe even this year as well), to hold the game in check while the Offense catches up. 

    Quick starts, fast finishes. If that comes out of the spread, so be it. We need points, and we need to score them early and often to put our defnese in the best position to succeed. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    If Brady and the offense sputter in the playoffs, they will lose and people will blame the defense. To me this is silly. This defense is not going to win playoff games. If they are going to make a run to the super bowl, it will be because Brady plays well, period.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from startrightnow. Show startrightnow's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? LMFAO What a bandwagon fan this guy is. LOL he bashes one of the 5 best QBs in the history of the...

    Surprised
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]If Brady and the offense sputter in the playoffs, they will lose and people will blame the defense. To me this is silly. This defense is not going to win playoff games. If they are going to make a run to the super bowl, it will be because Brady plays well, period.
    Posted by digger0862[/QUOTE]

    Wait, what? You can't blame the defense for losing because they're not good?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Wait, what? You can't blame the defense for losing because they're not good?
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    That is essentially my reaction to the whole crowd.  

    Scoring 21 points against an elite defense isn't world beating ... but it's an accomplishment. 

    Giving up 28 or 33 to a terrible offense like Baltimore or the Jests is very bad. 

    Then my other reaction is even simpler ... if the defense was so good, or even acceptable, after that loss, why did BB change the entire scheme and fire/demote 5 of the starters? 

    It is blatantly obvious he didn't like how the defense performed ... because he handed Meriweather, Sanders, TBC, and Warren their hats and demoted Cunningham. And then switched to 43.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]Wait, what? You can't blame the defense for losing because they're not good?
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]
    Only if they play worse than they have to this point. The offense carries this team, not the defense.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?

    In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Has anybody seen Rusty? : Only if they play worse than they have to this point. The offense carries this team, not the defense.
    Posted by digger0862[/QUOTE]


    Forgive my basketball analogy ... but at some point you need a bench.

    No team is equally good at offense and defense in the modern NFL. It hasn't been that way since the end of the Cowboys/Niners era and the salary cap.

    But at some point you have to recognize that the other unit needs to step up. Brady had half the tools he has now in the playoffs, and he managed to step up and get a win when the defense stumbled against elite offenses back in the day.

    I think this team just needs the "D" to "play" elite once or twice in the playoffs to get through a 3 to 4 team gauntlet. 

    Thankfully, I think the addition of Carter and Anderson might be enough to add that potential against teams like Baltimore and the Jets, who NE has been inconsistent against on account of their dominant defenses. 
     

Share