NFL Week 17

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

I'm not sure how getting the right call is a worse decision. Not changing it when it was clearly a lateral is an absolutely horrible (and wrong) decision. Elias goes through every game and makes changes each week. Robert Mathis was awarded a sack on a stat change in Week 16 and ended up beating Robert Quinn by 0.5 sacks to lead the league. Should we give the sack crown to Quinn?

It's amusing that a group that is so vocal about getting the calls correct during games then wants to turn a blind eye to the standard process that is used EVERY week to get the stats correct. Is it a tough break because of the record? Sure, but my answer to that is to stay in the game longer. Would he have inevitably broke it? Probably, but maybe he gets injured on the first play in the second half. Let's also not forget that the mark would have been higher if Brees didn't come out in his final game.

What if the situation were reversed and he was 6 yards shy of the record but had thrown a pass that went 7 yards but in the game was scored as a lateral? Should they correct it (as they do EVERY game)? You're damn right they should and this is no different.

The Broncos specifically checked with the NFL statistician to ensure Manning had the record before removing him from the game. To then cost him the record after the game due to an error on the NFL's part is inexcusable. That's not a "tough break". The bigger evil here is to say "whoops, we fucked up and now you lose the record" than it is to say "we're overlooking a very slight error in order to not create a bigger wrong". That's ok, we can have different opinions. Even though yours is wrong.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Patriots12

I think that people should stop complaining about the referees and complain more about the NFL. Every offseason they put new rules in the rulebook that make it harder for the refs to remember all these new rules. For example, the chargers having 7 men on one side is a rule that has never been called and those officials most likely forgot about these rules. The NFL needs to take out a few rules so that the officials can remember all these rules.

Unfortunately the new rules have also cost the patriots the game against the Jets. The rules states that you cant push another player on the offensive lineman. So how does two defensive lineman back to back get called. This is ruining the integrity of the game. Clearly the NFL needs to fix these errors. I pray that there are no errors that cost a team in the playoffs.

Sorry but I totally disagree.

The refs a very highly paid professionals whose job it is to know the rules and changes. I work in a highly regulated industry where rules change all the time and I am held accountable for knowing those changes, and I don't get paid what an NFL ref does.

If you want to blame the league for allowing them to have other jobs fine, or say the league should fire the more incompetent ones, fine, but to say the league should stop changing rules because the refs can't keep up with those changes is silly.

[Patriots12]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Sorry but I totally disagree.

The refs a very highly paid professionals whose job it is to know the rules and changes. I work in a highly regulated industry where rules change all the time and I am held accountable for knowing those changes, and I don't get paid what an NFL ref does.

If you want to blame the league for allowing them to have other jobs fine, or say the league should fire the more incompetent ones, fine, but to say the league should stop changing rules because the refs can't keep up with those changes is silly.

Well the NFL have so many rules that refs cant keep up and therefore they miss them like in the chargers game.

[Buccaneer]

"You could tell Josh did not know the offense," one Vikings player told USAToday.com's Tom Pelissero. "Practices did not really go that well that week. But Coach Frazier was in the team meetings like, 'Oh, I think this is the best week of practice we've had all year.' And everyone's like, what? What are you talking about?"

But four people with knowledge of the situation told Pelissero that Freeman was late to numerous meetings in his three months with the Vikings, and the quarterback was often among the last people to show up at the facility.

But one of Freeman's agents said "anything about meetings or missing anything is false," and the only problem was that Freeman played too soon.

Wherever the truth lies, Freeman's future remains uncertain. The Vikings, meanwhile, have fired Frazier and will almost certainly be in the market for their next franchise quarterback in the coming months.

Evidence #477 why you don't believe anything that comes out of the mouths of agents, PR flaks and spokespersons...and certain coaches too, apparently.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

The Broncos specifically checked with the NFL statistician to ensure Manning had the record before removing him from the game. To then cost him the record after the game due to an error on the NFL's part is inexcusable. That's not a "tough break". The bigger evil here is to say "whoops, we fucked up and now you lose the record" than it is to say "we're overlooking a very slight error in order to not create a bigger wrong". That's ok, we can have different opinions. Even though yours is wrong.

WRONG! But thanks for coming out. The Elias Sports Bureau is the NFL's official statistician. Game stats aren't official until the games have been reviewed by the NFL's official statistician. Unless what you're saying is that the Bronco's asked Elias to review every pass during the game and Elias had assured them that they had the record. Just asking the stat guys at the game? Nope, not good enough. Those aren't official stats and should not be treated as such. The Broncos are well aware of this and are also aware that stat changes occur after the fact as there have been numerous changes made to Bronco player stats in various weeks throughout this season following the games. If it was close (and I say 1 yard is pretty close) they should err on the side of caution and keep him in there.

This isn't an issue like his 50th touchdown pass to Decker that the NFL later confirmed was not a catch and should not have counted. I have no problem with that. You can't go back and change a call on the field after the game and there is no precedent for that. This is not an isolated incident. Elias Sports Bureau regularly ensures that all plays are scored correctly from a statistical standpoint for EVERY GAME for EVERY WEEK for EVERY SEASON. There should be no exceptions. Again, if the reverse were true, I would feel the same way and while it would be a shitty way to lose a record in that case, I have no doubt that they would do it.

For now...

5,477*

[MIJB#19]

It shocks me that Peyton Manning feels so strongly about breaking the individual passing touchdowns record. The Denver Broncos are wasting way too much time and energy on stuff that has zero influence on their ability to win football games in January and February. Save the statistics worrying for the media and fans, players shouldn't worry about it until the off-season starts.

[NobodyHere]

Pardon me for asking, but what exactly should the Broncos be doing?

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Pardon me for asking, but what exactly should the Broncos be doing?

What they always do to prepare for football games?

[Patriots12]

They prepare to break the scoreboard every week.

[fantom1979]

Just confirming what everyone already knew:

4000 yard passing seasons by decade:
1960s: 1
1970s: 1
1980s: 14
1990s: 22
2000s: 46
2010s: 35

1500 yard rushing seasons by decade:
1950s: 1
1960s: 2
1970s: 8
1980s: 16
1990s: 17
2000s: 34
2010s: 7

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Just confirming what everyone already knew:

4000 yard passing seasons by decade:
1960s: 1
1970s: 1
1980s: 14
1990s: 22
2000s: 46
2010s: 35

1500 yard rushing seasons by decade:
1950s: 1
1960s: 2
1970s: 8
1980s: 16
1990s: 17
2000s: 34
2010s: 7

I really, really hate this trend. I hate the fundamental changes that have happened to the game that made it this way.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

WRONG! But thanks for coming out. The Elias Sports Bureau is the NFL's official statistician. Game stats aren't official until the games have been reviewed by the NFL's official statistician. Unless what you're saying is that the Bronco's asked Elias to review every pass during the game and Elias had assured them that they had the record. Just asking the stat guys at the game? Nope, not good enough. Those aren't official stats and should not be treated as such. The Broncos are well aware of this and are also aware that stat changes occur after the fact as there have been numerous changes made to Bronco player stats in various weeks throughout this season following the games. If it was close (and I say 1 yard is pretty close) they should err on the side of caution and keep him in there.

This isn't an issue like his 50th touchdown pass to Decker that the NFL later confirmed was not a catch and should not have counted. I have no problem with that. You can't go back and change a call on the field after the game and there is no precedent for that. This is not an isolated incident. Elias Sports Bureau regularly ensures that all plays are scored correctly from a statistical standpoint for EVERY GAME for EVERY WEEK for EVERY SEASON. There should be no exceptions. Again, if the reverse were true, I would feel the same way and while it would be a shitty way to lose a record in that case, I have no doubt that they would do it.

For now...

5,477*

LOL, seriously you seem upset about this?

He was going to break the record before he was removed from the game. Whatever the details were it would be dumb to take a record from him that him and the team thought he had or most certainly would have had. Is Drew Brees complaining or whats the big deal? I think one way or another he deserved it. This is kind of a "common sense" issue that I am glad the NFL is using. Clearly, to not give someone the record that he would have easily had because of a scoring change isnt really in the best interest of anyone but Drew Brees fans.

[SackAttack]

High of -5 in Green Bay on Sunday. Low of -20. Wind chills expected to take that low down to -51.

The game kicks off at 3:40 local time, so it probably won't get to the low end of that scale, but...yeah, seriously, NFL. Black that game out. Dare ya.

[SirFozzie]

The Ice Bowl II......

(The Ice Bowl in the 1960's was at -13 Farenheit)

http://www.profootballhof.com/histor.../ice_bowl.aspx

[SnowMan]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I really, really hate this trend. I hate the fundamental changes that have happened to the game that made it this way.

I agree. Hopefully the success of San Fran, Seattle, Carolina, and Kansas City will spur some change back to the "old-school" style of running + defense.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

The Ice Bowl II......

(The Ice Bowl in the 1960's was at -13 Farenheit)

http://www.profootballhof.com/histor.../ice_bowl.aspx

If the San Diego / Bengals game was 1 day later, it might literally be Ice Bowl 2 with the same 2 teams, as that weather is scheduled to hit SW Ohio on Monday. High temp. of about 5, low of 10 below forecast for Monday. I imagine the fans are pretty pleased that it is supposed to be decent.

As it is, nasty rain/snow/ice mix predicted for Sunday.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

LOL, seriously you seem upset about this?

He was going to break the record before he was removed from the game. Whatever the details were it would be dumb to take a record from him that him and the team thought he had or most certainly would have had. Is Drew Brees complaining or whats the big deal? I think one way or another he deserved it. This is kind of a "common sense" issue that I am glad the NFL is using. Clearly, to not give someone the record that he would have easily had because of a scoring change isnt really in the best interest of anyone but Drew Brees fans.

It's in the interest of being correct, though. A lateral is a lateral, and I'm not particularly upset by this, but I am annoyed if they are keeping a wrong call wrong in the interest of servicing one player and his ego. Just seems stupid.

[Suburban Rhythm]

The best way to describe my feelings about the NFL over the last 5-7 years is, when I listen to myself discuss the things that bother me, I sound like a cranky old man. I'm 37.

I think back to when I was in my teens and never missed a Steelers game, and would regularly watch the 4pm games after, and be excited for MNF.

I haven't watched a non-Steelers MNF game in at least 3 years.

I'm not asking for outlawing the forward pass, but something that more closely resembles what I watched growing up, not all the long ago. I find the current product pretty unwatchable.

*shakes fist*

[Logan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

High of -5 in Green Bay on Sunday. Low of -20. Wind chills expected to take that low down to -51.

The game kicks off at 3:40 local time, so it probably won't get to the low end of that scale, but...yeah, seriously, NFL. Black that game out. Dare ya.

Seeing how they still had a lot of tickets to sell, and being a Niner fan who has also always wanted to go to a game at Lambeau, I very briefly considered looking into how much it would run to get out there. But at that temperature, it's just not worth the effort...the only part of the experience you'd be getting is the cold.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Just confirming what everyone already knew:

4000 yard passing seasons by decade:
1960s: 1
1970s: 1
1980s: 14
1990s: 22
2000s: 46
2010s: 35

1500 yard rushing seasons by decade:
1950s: 1
1960s: 2
1970s: 8
1980s: 16
1990s: 17
2000s: 34
2010s: 7

I'd recommend removing the 50s, 60s and 70s numbers, because the 16-game schedule wasn't introduced until the 1978 season.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

The best way to describe my feelings about the NFL over the last 5-7 years is, when I listen to myself discuss the things that bother me, I sound like a cranky old man. I'm 37.

I think back to when I was in my teens and never missed a Steelers game, and would regularly watch the 4pm games after, and be excited for MNF.

I haven't watched a non-Steelers MNF game in at least 3 years.

I'm not asking for outlawing the forward pass, but something that more closely resembles what I watched growing up, not all the long ago. I find the current product pretty unwatchable.

*shakes fist*

Is it really the product though, or just that you have other things you need to be doing with your time?

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I really, really hate this trend. I hate the fundamental changes that have happened to the game that made it this way.

The other trend that would be worth paying attention to is the trend of the NFL as a total monstrous cash bonanza for its owners and equity partners. Its ability to generate profits might be on an even more impressive upward trend than the offensive statistics that some of us find, well, offensive.

So...what was our point again?

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Is it really the product though, or just that you have other things you need to be doing with your time?

But I've always had other things. Sure, as my kids are getting older, they have more activities. But nothing going on when they're in bed at 9pm on a Monday night.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Just confirming what everyone already knew:

4000 yard passing seasons by decade:
1980s: 14
1990s: 22
2000s: 46
2010s: 35

1500 yard rushing seasons by decade:
1980s: 16
1990s: 17
2000s: 34
2010s: 7

What trend are you trying to show here?
Fwiw, I'd be more interested in team stats rather than individual numbers, taking the assumption that indeed these are individual numbers.

[Buccaneer]

I do not like the demise of the running back but fully in favor of seeing more great passers and their core of receivers/tight ends. Maybe if high schools/colleges can spend less time on QB who can run but not throw and more on re-developing the running backs, we'll see more of that in the pros (like the Montana/Craig, Elway/TD, Warner/Faulk combos).

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I do not like the demise of the running back but fully in favor of seeing more great passers and their core of receivers/tight ends. Maybe if high schools/colleges can spend less time on QB who can run but not throw and more on re-developing the running backs, we'll see more of that in the pros (like the Montana/Craig, Elway/TD, Warner/Faulk combos).

Thing is that high schools are the main reason we don't see running backs anymore. It used to be you would see a high school QB throw maybe 10 times a game but now they throw 35 or more times in a game. Guys would go to college to learn to become passers so they would get to the NFL and be able to throw. High schools are now running these offenses they never had the courage to run before and guys are going to college QB ready and even moreso to the NFL.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I do not like the demise of the running back but fully in favor of seeing more great passers and their core of receivers/tight ends. Maybe if high schools/colleges can spend less time on QB who can run but not throw and more on re-developing the running backs, we'll see more of that in the pros (like the Montana/Craig, Elway/TD, Warner/Faulk combos).

Will never happen. High schools and colleges are going to develop guys they can win with. They have all figured out if the QB touches the ball every play, and he is the best athlete on the field, they have a better chnce of winning. Doesn't matter at all if they can throw or not.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Is it really the product though, or just that you have other things you need to be doing with your time?

There's so much NFL that I'm to the point that I tune much of it out and the games just don't feel as special as they used too.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Is it really the product though, or just that you have other things you need to be doing with your time?

It's the product. I like hard-hitting, smash-mouth football. I like seeing one team impose its will on another. Now the game seems to come down to whoever has the ball with more than 1 minute to go in the 4th quarter will almost always win. Defenses have almost no chance anymore. Not to mention the ticky-tack, confusing and sometimes even seemingly contradictory rules results in virtually every big play being questioned and reviewed - or at least it seems that way. It's akin to flag football with awful refs, awful rules and awful defenses.

While people may disagree on these points, that's the way I see the current NFL. It's not that I no longer like the sport, but my interest over the last 5 years has substantially waned.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

It's the product. I like hard-hitting, smash-mouth football. I like seeing one team impose its will on another. Now the game seems to come down to whoever has the ball with more than 1 minute to go in the 4th quarter will almost always win. Defenses have almost no chance anymore. Not to mention the ticky-tack, confusing and sometimes even seemingly contradictory rules results in virtually every big play being questioned and reviewed - or at least it seems that way. It's akin to flag football with awful refs, awful rules and awful defenses.

While people may disagree on these points, that's the way I see the current NFL. It's not that I no longer like the sport, but my interest over the last 5 years has substantially waned.

Maybe I'm part of the problem, but I feel like I understand less each week.

[Logan]

Coming back to the refs discussion...

Jeff Triplette Is Working A Playoff Game For Some Reason

[Coffee Warlord]

Press conference with Trestman & Emery right now - word is Cutler & Tim Jennings have been re-signed.

Cutler to a (yikes) 7 year deal, Jennings for 4. Matt Slauson also added for 4.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Press conference with Trestman & Emery right now - word is Cutler & Tim Jennings have been re-signed.

Cutler to a (yikes) 7 year deal, Jennings for 4. Matt Slauson also added for 4.

Seven years for Cutler? I would've tried to sign him for one or two years and see if he still is capable of playing in the NFL.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Logan

Coming back to the refs discussion...

Jeff Triplette Is Working A Playoff Game For Some Reason

I feel sorry for the fans of them two teams.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Press conference with Trestman & Emery right now - word is Cutler & Tim Jennings have been re-signed.

Cutler to a (yikes) 7 year deal, Jennings for 4. Matt Slauson also added for 4.

Gotta see the money of course, but I think franchising him may have been the best move over $50 million or whatever in guaranteed money and a $20MM annual salary.

Although I do see the appeal in making a commitment to that offensive core and trying to rebuild the defense to get to the next level.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Logan

Coming back to the refs discussion...

Jeff Triplette Is Working A Playoff Game For Some Reason

I think this paragraph says it all about NFL officiating:

So why is Triplette working the postseason? The NFL's playoff assignments are solely merit-based—officials are graded after every game, and the highest-scoring ones get the plum January jobs. (And paychecks! Never forget that these are part-time employees.) So, presumably Triplette was among the best refs in the league in 2013. Without being privy to the NFL's grading rubric, this might be foremost an indictment of the rest of the zebras.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

Seven years for Cutler? I would've tried to sign him for one or two years and see if he still is capable of playing in the NFL.

To be fair, it's really the guaranteed amount that matters (and those details I don't have), not the contract length. So we'll see. Bears do have one of the best cap guys around, so I'm sure he worked the usual math magic.

Originally Posted by Logan

Gotta see the money of course, but I think franchising him may have been the best move over $50 million or whatever in guaranteed money and a $20MM annual salary.

Franchising him would have likely been hugely more expensive in terms of cap hit, I'm guessing. And the Bears have a LOT of players they need to sign.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Franchising him would have likely been hugely more expensive in terms of cap hit, I'm guessing. And the Bears have a LOT of players they need to sign.

I saw speculation that the tag price would have been just north of $16MM, and I'd be surprised if he came in far enough under that number to have that big of an effect on the roster. Then you have the added risk of an enormous amount of guaranteed money and locking yourself in.

But it doesn't matter. You only franchise the guy if you're unsure. They clearly weren't unsure unless we see the deal was structured in a Revis-style way, which I highly doubt.

[Dr. Sak]

One comment about playoff assignments: We all know the referees because they are the face of the crew and the ones who get their names announced by the announcers. So while a certain Referee's crew might be subpar, that does not mean it is the Referee's fault. When a deep official makes an incorrect call and gets dinged for a DPI that should/shouldn't have been called, only the calling official gets the downgrade, not the Referee. But "we" see it as Jeff Triplette when in fact it is his deep official.

That being said, I would not be surprised if this was Triplette's last game in the NFL.

[albionmoonlight]

Dr. Sak,

What's your opinion on whether the NFL should have full-time officials? I've seen the arguments pro and con, but I'd love your insider perspective.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

One comment about playoff assignments: We all know the referees because they are the face of the crew and the ones who get their names announced by the announcers. So while a certain Referee's crew might be subpar, that does not mean it is the Referee's fault. When a deep official makes an incorrect call and gets dinged for a DPI that should/shouldn't have been called, only the calling official gets the downgrade, not the Referee. But "we" see it as Jeff Triplette when in fact it is his deep official.

Makes sense. How does the league address issues that aren't correct/incorrect like the ending of that Washington game and the 3rd/1st down? Does the ref get a ding that is included as part of the percentage or is that something that would be handled in a manner like what you say below?

I'm also guessing that making the wrong call on a review (like Triplette on the BJGE goal line run) gets included but maybe that's where it needs to be weighted very differently.

That being said, I would not be surprised if this was Triplette's last game in the NFL.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

There's so much NFL that I'm to the point that I tune much of it out and the games just don't feel as special as they used too.

I find myself watching more NFL than ever, but ignoring things Tuesday-Saturday, including the Thursday game on NFL Network, not necessarily because its too much football spread throughout the week, but because the quality of the Thursday game seems to be shit no matter the participants, I keep an eye on the score and only turn it on if its close in the 4th quarter.

Because of Red Zone, I don't even feel the need to watch highlight shows, because I've already seen everything. I no longer watch any pregame, no ESPN talking outside of MNF. I tune this thread out for hours/days at a time when people get stuck on the same 2-3 topics, so I never feel overwhelmed by too much NFL.

I read enough online that I don't feel like I'm missing anything, I'm never surprised by a storyline that comes up, I just get to choose my level of investment and can easily avoid ever getting beaten down by a story to the point that I like the games less.


I understand the sentiment though, its happened to me in other sports. I essentially quit college basketball last year and college football 2-3 years ago and replaced it with other things, but the NFL is going stronger than ever for me.

[Logan]

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter

Extension for Lions QB Matthew Stafford came in at $17.6 million per year avg. Bears QB Jay Cutler's 7-yr deal figures to be slightly north.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Logan

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter

Extension for Lions QB Matthew Stafford came in at $17.6 million per year avg. Bears QB Jay Cutler's 7-yr deal figures to be slightly north.

Since it's coming from Schefter, that means it's quite a bit south of that number.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Dr. Sak,

What's your opinion on whether the NFL should have full-time officials? I've seen the arguments pro and con, but I'd love your insider perspective.

I don't really know the ins and outs of this argument. I know some of the Pros are that they can fully focus on being an official and that is better for the game. However, for the most part they all do this during the season and most of the preseason anyway.

Most of these guys have high paying, high profile jobs...lawyers, dentists, insurance agents...business owners, and some are even Conference Commish's for the NCAA (B1G, Big 12, AAC, etc). If they become full time the NFL will make them quit those jobs. So would you want to quit your other job to become a NFL official when your shelf life might be anywhere from 5 to 15 years?

The pay is good buy our average citizen standards but it is a drop in the bucket compared to NFL standards. For me to quit my job and work full time for the NFL, I'd want a little more job security and that defeats some of the purpose of being able to get rid of the under performers.

Personally, I am still so far away from even thinking about the NFL that I don't get caught up in the the full-time vs not full time gig. So I apologize I really can't answer your question with any more insight than you probably already know.

[albionmoonlight]

No worries. Having read Peter King's pieces on how much prep the refs do, I can't see how making them full-time would really add enough to their ability to make it worthwhile.

I mean, making the refs take more quizzes about obscure rules during the week so that you can justify them being "full time" seems like more window dressing than anything.

And, like you note, it does not seem like a lot of officials would even want it.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Logan

Makes sense. How does the league address issues that aren't correct/incorrect like the ending of that Washington game and the 3rd/1st down? Does the ref get a ding that is included as part of the percentage or is that something that would be handled in a manner like what you say below?

I'm also guessing that making the wrong call on a review (like Triplette on the BJGE goal line run) gets included but maybe that's where it needs to be weighted very differently.

There are plays that numerous officials and even the entire crew can get a downgrade. One example is a clock issue...everyone is responsible for the clock so that's a case where an entire crew could get a downgrade.

Replay calls are handled the same way as regular calls. The calling official does not get a downgrade on a bang bang TD play where it needs to go to replay. But the Referee could get a downgrade if he is wrong on the call after reviewing it on replay.

Did I answer your question? (Sorry running on fumes this morning and the brain isn't functioning at its best)

[Logan]

Yes sir, thanks.

[molson]

Might as well hand the Pats the trophy

Hulk Hogan declares he's a Pats fan - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by molson

Might as well hand the Pats the trophy

Hulk Hogan declares he's a Pats fan - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Because they have won so many in the past decade?