Sports : most overrated player from 4 major sports!

nba - yao ming. he has surpassed iverson as the most overrated
nfl - emmitt smith. anybody could have done what he did with that o line
mlb - derek jeter - good at best, not great.
nhl - cindy crosby. she is lucky she gets to play with malkin who is top 3 in nhl.

I am the Messiah

there are 5 people in the history of MLB with more hits than Derek Jeter, but he's not great?

Jeter was certainly consistently very good. I will say that he was overrated as a fielder, though. No way he should have five gold gloves. He'd make a great play here and there but in terms of just defending his position, his fielding percentage and range were pretty consistently subpar.

Don't ever use awards as a factor in deciding how great someone is, especially the GG award. So many idiots vote for the name rather than what the person did.

In 1996, Brian Jordan had more chances and put-outs, to go with less errors, and Barry Bonds won a GG.

Pujols sets the record for assists and Adrian Gonzales wins it with less put outs and 50 less assists. Not only that, but Pujols played so far off the line it was almost like a 2nd baseman playing for a bunt which allowed the 2nd baseman to play up the middle more.

I'm a Cardinals fan (if you couldn't tell) and I'd certainly would have loved to have had Jeter follow Ozzie for the Cards.

Iverson was never overrated wtf are u taking about ?

He was a chucker. Look at his shooting percentages.

Jordan was far, far more efficient, for example.

-Sitting on a cornflake waiting for the van to come

He never had nearly the supporting cast MJ had. He HAD to shoot a lot. I saw him take over games. He's what? 160lbs wet? Pound for Pound he is the toughest player and had more heart than any player ever.

---

Pound for Pound he is the toughest player and had more heart than any player ever.

---

He did achieve a lot for a small guy playing a big man's game. I'll grant him that.



-Sitting on a cornflake waiting for the van to come

Yeah, Melo for sure in the NBA

DeNiro, you sonofabitch!

==================
Sex with animals? There's no time, man!

MLB is Bryce Harper at least for current players. That guy was being heralded as the best player of a generation and he's only had one great year, the other years he hasn't even hit above 274, and last year he hit 243 with 24 HR's, that is an average year, not really even a good one. This guy is nowhere near as good as Trout or any other truly great player, overhyped and overrated. So take that Deniro.

The dude is 24 years old! And, I'll add, he already has an MVP award.

Not being as great as Trout - which he clearly isn't - doesn't make him one bit overrated.

The guy was being heralded as the greatest baseball player ever. I don't think a player in any sport had gotten more hype at that age since LeBron. He is clearly overrated. He has never done much in the playoffs, and he's only had one great year. The guy who was being heralded as the greatest thing since sliced bread batted 243 last year, I would say that is overrated.

But why I am arguing with some idiot with David Clarke as his user picture.

it seems like your list is talking about of all time rather than current. i'm gonna give both

nba - good call on yao ming/steph curry currently
nfl - terry bradshaw or joe Namath/clay Matthews currently
mlb - I haven't watched mlb in ages, so i'll just say, from back in my day I always hated paul o'neil
*beep* nhl. don't care

Where did you get those clothes, the toilet store?

NBA - Tim Duncan. It's absurd to think he's the best PF of all time.
NFL - Peyton Manning. It's absurd to even consider him top 5 QB of all time, yet every casual thinks he is.
MLB - Cal Ripken. It's absurb a guy with 2 great seasons spread apart by ten years is in the Hall of Fame. He's worse than Jeter. At least Jeter could get hits.
NHL - Henrik Lunqvist. The way announcers fawn over the guy, you'd think he pitched a million shut outs in clutch playoff games. I've never seen a guy who was praised that much give up so many cheap, easy, ticky tack goals.

---

Peyton Manning. It's absurd to even consider him top 5 QB of all time, yet every casual thinks he is.

---

Look at all the records he broke. There is no way he is NOT top 5 all time. Personally, I would put him in top 3.

He broke them playing in doors, in the weakest division of all of time. 9 games in doors against friggen expansion teams! 8 of them pumping in crowd noise into the PA. He threw like 6 TDs within 2 yards of the endzone with a pro bowler RB waiting to hear number never get called. The whole time, Peyton running up the score against teams already booking their flights out of town by the end of the 3rd.

He did none of that in the playoffs EVER. Because the tomato cans he beat up in the regular season don't exist there. Occasionally one will sneak in to the 6th seed with dumb tie breakers or even a bad division winner. He's a fraud. There is no better way to describe overrated than Peyton Manning.

And yes, every great QB beats on bad teams, but they don't put up pedestrian numbers in the playoffs. THEY DO IT THERE TOO. Someone like Drew Brees does exactly what Manning does all season, but actually has good playoff numbers. He isn't responsible for choking away several games because he couldn't produce more than 20 points and ran the offense like shyt when it counts. And everyone is always quick to claim he runs the offense. So it's his fault when they score 30+ all season and can barely muster 21. So it's no shock they lose and Peyton is a record one and done every year.

Plus, the only two rings he had, he played awful too. He was carried by Bob Sanders, the refs, and Von Miller for them. There couldn't be any more evidence of how much of a fraud Peyton Manning is, yet casuals and morons keep looking at his overinflated numbers and think he's something special. He's not even better than Drew Brees. But Drew Brees isn't out there doing a million bad commercial trying to get exposure, and make money to pay the woman he sexually assaulted in college like Peyton does.

Damn citation, 4 paragraphs???? you must take this personally. LOL!!

Poor division or not, he did it against NFL teams. And you are wrong that he "never" did it in the playoffs. He had to overcome an 18 point lead against the Patriots the year he won his first SB. That game was one of the greatest displays of QBing I've ever seen. Besides that, Manning would have at least one more ring (maybe two) if it wasn't for spygate. They had to cheat to beat him and they knew it too.

Sorry. No. That AFC championship game was a fuqqing joke with at least 14 points gifted to the Colts on shyt calls, and 7 points taken away from the Pats on a blatant PI out in the open, in the endzone. I've mentioned it in other topics and I'm tired of repeating myself. Peyton Manning gets zero credit for that tainted victory. THAT WAS FLAT OUT CHEATING. That fact that you think that was great QB says a lot. Whats great about throwing a ball past the endzone and getting a 30-40 penalty when the CB never touched the receiver? Whats great about being gifted 15 yards and a first down after throwing an incompletion because a DL tapped his helmets while being shoved into Manning by his own linemen?

And Sorry again. No, recording signals from an area that is illegal when they were already recorded by the league in a different area is not. Those tapes were burned because the majority of the film was the guy point his camera at women's T&A (that's how vital they were). Jay Glazer will attest to this. He saw the tapes. Goodell did not want that kind of publicity.

Besides, the Pats never needed extra help beating that Colts. That's something Peyton needed from the refs, a dome, and fake crowd noise. But I'm not turning this into a Brady vs Manning thing like so many Manning sympathizers like to do. His piss poor numbers in the playoffs speak for themselves. I've won so much betting against him, and every time people make excuses for him.

They look at the Ravens game and give him credit for the 35 points they scored, even though without the 2 specials scores it would have been a blow out win for the Ravens. Then when it comes time for Manning to close out the game or win, he does was he always does in that situation, cowers and gives the other team the win. The epitome of overrated. The only big moment he had was a comeback fueled by bad calls because the league was trying to hand him a much needed trophy to legitimize his endorsement power, since he was becoming a joke. But he's still a joke to meand a sex offender.

---

Poor division or not, he did it against NFL teams. And you are wrong that he "never" did it in the playoffs. He had to overcome an 18 point lead against the Patriots the year he won his first SB. That game was one of the greatest displays of QBing I've ever seen.

---

Yes, arrogant Pats' fans claim that Brad is the greatest QB ever and that Manning is the most over-rated QB ever, yet not only did Manning lead the Colts to an 18-point comeback win (the largest comeback ever in a Conference Championship or Super Bowl game) over Brady and the Patriots in the 2006 AFC Championship Game but Manning also beat Brady in 2 more AFC Championship Games.

So the guy who is supposedly the greatest ever goes 1-3 in AFC Championship Games vs the guy who is supposedly the most over-rated ever. LOL!!!

---

Besides that, Manning would have at least one more ring (maybe two) if it wasn't for spygate. They had to cheat to beat him and they knew it too.

---

Yep, Brady's only postseason wins vs Manning were when the Patriots were cheating during SpyGate. Brady couldn't beat Manning in the postseason without cheating and had to cheat to beat Manning in the postseason.

Manning isn't the GOAT but I agree he's probably top 5, he broke so many records and totally changed the way the game was played. I have never been a big fan of him personally and I don't like his family, but he was a terrific QB, he just had problems in the playoffs, if he had more than 1 title while his was in his prime in Indy, he would be in contention for the GOAT.

No one really overrated guys like Terry Bradshaw or Joe Namath. Bradshaw was a good QB on a great team and Namath was a good QB who's charisma and personality made him into a big star.

I would argue John Elway for most overrated NFL QB. The guy is frequently mentioned alongside the like of Joe Montana and Dan Marino which is absurd. Elway had problems with turnovers, he only threw for 4000 yards once while Marino did it regularly, and Elway crapped his pants in the postseason every year until the Broncos got a great rusher in Terrell Davis and they won 2 Super Bowls. If it wasn't for Terrell Davis, Elway would have no Super Bowls and would forever be remembered as the biggest postseason choker ever.

Manning did not change the way the game was played. He used the Run and Shoot offense that failed the 90s Falcons, Lions, Bills and Oilers time and time again, which is why no one wanted to use it, except fraud Manning because he cares more about stat padding for Papa Johns endorsement dollars than winning. He's got HGH to buy, and people to pay to keep quiet about his sex offense.

If you think Payton Manning is top 5, where is Drew Brees? Please make a case for how Manning is better than Brees when you included playoff stats and throw out that one SB that Peyton Manning did nothing to earn in Denver. They both break records, put up ridiculous regular season numbers, won Superbowls, except one doesn't shrink in the playoffs. And don't get it twisted. I'm not advocating Brees is top 5 either. He's just on the same level as Peighton, and people like Favre, Marino, and Moon.

you can't measure a QB on rings like that. Manning was great, the fact that he only got 1 ring in his prime doesn't take anything away from him.

elway was overrated but won back to back super bowls with an MVP in one of them. marino was great and has none. that has no bearing on talent level though.

brees is almost as good as P manning. nothing to do with rings though. teams win championships, not players

Agreed.

Who would you pick over Tim Duncan as the greatest PF ever? Don't say Karl Malone or Kevin McHale.

He's not a PF. He played PF for like 3 years. What PF's do the opening tip off? NONE.

That's an insult to players like Charles Barkley, Dirk Nowitzki, KG, who actually played PF and are all better than Duncan offensively, By MILES! Defensively, Duncan was a system player who would shy away from covering Shaq, Dirk, KG, etc., so he can guard a non threat and be used for help defense. When he had to cover elite scorers, he got shyt on. That's not a great defender. That's just a tall guy using his height to block guards shots when they come into the lane. Any tall person can do that. A great defender wouldn't let people like Dirk come in and consistently score 30+ against the Spurs.

Duncan wasn't even the best defender on his team. It was Bruce Bowen, who was a dirty player who purposely injured people. So it's pointless to bring up Duncan defensively. What he did was irrelevant, and so was his offense. The Spurs had a terrible record when he scored more than 30 because when he's taking all the shots, the players who actually carried the Spurs weren't getting enough looks. That would never happen to a player that was truly great.

Dirk Nowitzki willed the Mavericks through the playoffs for like 11 straight 4th quarters. Duncan would be lucky to score 4 points in the 4th quarter. ESPN built this guy up showing mandatory Duncan 1st quarter highlights every game, even when he did nothing special, and people bought it because everyone is a stupid puppet dancing on strings for the media, who are always trying to sell these phony heroes like Duncan and Manning, giving them undeserved credit, attention, and awards. Duncan had no business ever winning an MVP over Shaq.

You make some good points but it's hard to think of another player from his position and size who brings it with points , rebounds AND blocks. The only other person that comes to mind is KG. Def not Nowitski though. Dirk is the best shooting big man all time, let's just leave it at that though.

More than 99.9% of all football fans rank Manning in the top three QBs of all time.

The MLS is now the 3rd most popular spectator sport in America, it has higher average attendances than the NBA and NHL, and isn't far behind MLB!

So, ya betta recogniiiiiiiise!

Berger! Exposed last night!

Amazing how they would be that popular when most of the soccer games ends in ties

---

it has higher average attendances than the NBA and NHL

---

I'm sure the seating capacity in outdoor stadiums vs indoor arenas has nothing to do with that. That's like WWE proclaiming that they have the highest attendance ever in some building. Yea, it's easy to do that when you can put rows of chairs in areas that are part of the court in a basketball game.

NBA Jimmy Butler from the Chicago Bulls
NFL Tom Brady
MLB Albert Pujols
NHL Corey Crawford

I agree with Tom Brady. A great QB to be sure, but also one of the most overrated I've ever seen.

---

Tom Brady. A great QB to be sure, but also one of the most overrated I've ever seen.

---

Agreed.

Bob Costas once said that Barry Bonds would still be a great player and 1 of the best players of his era without steroids, but he wouldn't be in the 700+ HR club with Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron if not for steroids. Steroids is what helped Bonds reach Ruthian levels.

Likewise, without cheating Brady would still be a pretty good QB, but he wouldn't have won any Super Bowls without cheating. Cheating is what helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls. Basically, without cheating Brady and the Patriots would just be this generation's version of the 1990s Buffalo Bills, a pretty good team that wasn't good enough to win the Super Bowl.

---

Likewise, without cheating Brady would still be a pretty good QB, but he wouldn't have won any Super Bowls without cheating. Cheating is what helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls. Basically, without cheating Brady and the Patriots would just be this generation's version of the 1990s Buffalo Bills, a pretty good team that wasn't good enough to win the Super Bowl.

---

That's absurd, preposterous, and utterly stupid. The guy is going to his 7th Super Bowl. The only evidence of "cheating" comes from Spygate and Deflategate. First, I won't defend Spygate that much, but honestly, do you really think that that made all of the difference in the Pats' success? Secondly, the New York Times conclusively proved that Deflategate accusations did not add up, scientifically. Also, in that game, Brady did BETTER in the second half and the Colts lost 45-7. And last I checked, they could have made the Super Bowl last year if Gastowski could have made an extra point and they're 16-2 this year and going to the Super Bowl again.

I don't think that "cheating" is why Brady is so good.

When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

The guy is going to his 7th Super Bowl.

---

And 4 of them were because of cheating.

---

The only evidence of "cheating" comes from Spygate and Deflategate.

---

And that cheating helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls.

---

I won't defend Spygate that much, but honestly, do you really think that that made all of the difference in the Pats' success?

---

The Patriots won 3 Super Bowls when they were cheating during SpyGate. Then they lost 2 Super Bowls and couldn't win another Super Bowl for 9 years, until they started cheating again with DeflateGate. So clearly SpyGate gave the Patriots enough of an advantage to turn what probably would've been a close loss into 3-point wins in each of those first 3 Super Bowls.

---

the New York Times conclusively proved that Deflategate accusations did not add up, scientifically.

---

The New York Times didn't prove anything. All the New York Times did was offer their opinion, which they were never willing to subject to the scrutiny of cross-examination, because they knew their opinion would never hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination. Professor Marlow (a Physics Professor and former Charmain of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, the same Princeton University that Albert Einstein was a resident scholar of) not only gave his analysis but also came forward and subjected his analysis to the scrutiny of cross-examination, because he knew his analysis would hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

And it did. Brady's lawyers tried their best to poke holes in Professor Marlow's analysis, but they failed to debunk or discredit Professor Marlow's analysis. So Professor Marlow, whom the highly-respected Ivy League university that Albert Einstein was a resident scholar of made the Chairman of their Department of Physics, conclusively proved that the deflation in the Patriots footballs was caused by human tampering.

---

in that game, Brady did BETTER in the second half and the Colts lost 45-7.

---

That is the weakest, dumbest argument ever and doesn't prove that Brady didn't gain an advantage from cheating in DeflateGate.

When the Lions played the Cowboys this season, the Cowboys' defense dominated the Lions' offense in the 2nd half and the Cowboys shut out the Lions 21-0 in the 2nd half. So based on your weak dumb argument that if a team played well in the 2nd half, they must've also played well in the 1st half so the Cowboys must've whipped the Lions 42-0, right?

But that's not what happened. The Lions' offense moved the ball and scored at will against the Cowboys' defense in the 1st half and the 1st half ended in a 21-21 tie. So just because a team played better in the 2nd half, that doesn't mean they would've played just as well in the 1st half.

There is ZERO evidence to prove that Brady would've played better in the 1st half with regular size footballs. The ONLY thing we know for sure is that Brady played the 1st half with illegally-tampered footballs and those illegally-tampered footballs gave Brady and the Patriots enough of an advantage in the 1st half to build a double-digit halftime lead, which forced the Colts to change their game plan for the 2nd half. Therefore, the Patriots gained a HUGE advantage from using the illegally-tampered footballs in the 1st half and thus that win and the subsequent Super Bowl win are both tainted by cheating.

---

they could have made the Super Bowl last year if Gastowski could have made an extra point

---

1st, just as a team playing well in the 2nd half is no guarantee that they would've played just as well in the 1st half, Gostkowski making the PAT is no guarantee that the Patriots would've won that game. Gostkowski's PAT would've only resulted in a tie and OT. The Broncos beat the Patriots in OT earlier in the season and could've done it again, even if Gostkowski had made the PAT in the 1st quarter.

2nd, just as Scott Norwood didn't make the FG and the Bills didn't win the Super Bowl, Gostkowski didn't make the PAT and the Patriots didn't win the AFC Championship last season. So without cheating, the Patriots just weren't good enough to win.

---

they're 16-2 this year and going to the Super Bowl again.

---

In 2007, they were 18*-0 and went to the Super Bowl. But they couldn't win that Super Bowl, because they couldn't cheat.

---

I don't think that "cheating" is why Brady is so good.

---

Cheating was the reason why Rosie Ruiz won the Boston Marathon and why Ben Johnson won the 100-meter sprint final at the 1988 Olympics, and cheating is also the reason why Brady won his 4 Super Bowls.

Listen, we've been back and forth with this. Obviously we're going to have to agree to disagree, so it's pointless arguing further. I do respect your opinion, though. But you really have an extreme hatred against the Pats! Is this jealousy? Who is your team?

When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

you really have an extreme hatred against the Pats!

---

Because I hate cheaters and frauds.

I used to like watching Ben Johnson race. But it turned out that he was nothing but a cheater and fraud. Similarly, prior to 2007 I actually respected the Patriots. But it turned out that they were nothing but cheaters and frauds too.

Brady and the Patriots are like the Bernie Madoff of the NFL. Madoff scammed and stole money that he didn't earn from thousands of people who worked hard to earn that money. Similarly, Brady and the Patriots cheated and basically stole championships that they didn't earn from other teams and players who worked hard to try to earn a championship.

Its only fitting that Judge Denny Chin (the same judge who sentenced Madoff to a 150-year prison term for fraud) was the judge who casted the deciding vote to affirm the guilty verdict and punishment (which no federal judge would ever vote in favor of if he believed that a defendant was innocent) of Brady for cheating in DeflateGate. Judge Chin knows a fraud when he sees one, and Judge Chin could see that Brady was a liar and fraud.

Also, Judge Chin's decision debunks all the claims by dumb Patriots fans of a conspiracy against Brady. Judge Chin is an unbiased federal appellate court judge with no affiliation to the NFL and wasn't part of any conspiracy against Brady. But Judge Chin could see that "the evidence of ball tampering is compelling" and could see that Brady was a liar and fraud.

---

Is this jealousy?

---

No, the San Antonio Spurs win a lot (in fact, the Spurs with 5 NBA Championships have had more success than the Patriots), but I don't hate them. The New York Yankees have won the most championships in US pro team sports, but I don't hate them. I don't hate success, when it's rightfully earned. I just hate cheaters and frauds, who take shortcuts and cheat and don't earn it.

---

Who is your team?

---

My NFL team is the Dallas Cowboys, who have had more success (5 Super Bowl wins, an NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons) than the Patriots. So like I said above, I don't hate success, when it's rightfully earned. I just hate cheaters and frauds, who take shortcuts and cheat and don't earn it.

Ben Johnson is a good example of a frauddid you see the 30 for 30 movie on that? But come on Even if you assume that the Pats deflated ballswhich I certainly don't, but let's just say that for the sake of argumenttheir balls were deflated by a half-pound? Do you really think that's the reason why Brady is so good? The Patriots are 16-2 WITHOUT DEFLATED BALLS THIS YEAR. So is that to be disregarded? Does this reflect Brady's "cheating"? So he doesn't "earn it"?

Aaron Rodgers admitted that he likes to over-inflate the balls. So do you consider him a cheater too? (Maybe the reason why he's never been caught is because no one's ever tested or complained about the balls, as the Colts did to the Pats.)

I used to be a Dallas fan back in the 90s, and a huge Aikman fan. I still have a Cowboys winter hat, lol (I don't wear it anymore since I live in Florida). And still am a Cowboys fan. However, aside from this year, they've been a .500 team for the last decade in a half, with maybe some exceptions. Those 20 straight winning seasons happened decades ago. Historically they're great, but they haven't really been a superpower since Aikman in the early-mid 90s. It just seems that you're just jealous and looking for anything to use against the Pats, who have been dominant for 15 years. Even if they don't win every year, they're always right up therewhich I cannot say for the 'Boys.

And like I said, do you consider Aaron Rodgers a cheater because he has over-inflated balls and just hasn't been caught?



When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

Do you really think that's the reason why Brady is so good? The Patriots are 16-2 WITHOUT DEFLATED BALLS THIS YEAR. So is that to be disregarded? Does this reflect Brady's "cheating"? So he doesn't "earn it"?

---

You must not have gotten my point above when I wrote that Bob Costas once said that Barry Bonds would still be a great player and 1 of the best players of his era without steroids. I'll try to explain it more clearly.

Without steroids, would Bonds still be a member of the 500+ HR club? Yes, most likely. Without steroids, would Bonds still be a member of the 600+ HR club? Maybe. Without steroids, would Bonds have joined Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron in the 700+ HR club? Probably not. Steroids is what helped Bonds reach Ruthian levels.

Similarly, without cheating would Brady and the Patriots still be able to go 16-2? Yes. Without cheating would Brady have joined Joe Montana with 4 Super Bowl wins? Absolutely not. Brady hasn't won even 1 Super Bowl without cheating. Cheating is what helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls and tie Montana's (and Bradshaw's) record.

16-2 is a good record. So was 18*-1. But even with an 18*-1 season, they still weren't good enough to win the Super Bowl, without cheating. He earned 16-2, but he never earned a Super Bowl win without cheating.

---

Aaron Rodgers admitted that he likes to over-inflate the balls.

---

Rodgers says he prefers over-inflated footballs. But there's no evidence that Rodgers ever used over-inflated footballs in a game.

If all Brady did was say that preferred deflated footballs, but hadn't actually used deflated footballs in a game, then that wouldn't be cheating. But Brady was caught using deflated footballs in a game (and not just any game, but an AFC Championship Game to advance to the Super Bowl) and was proven to have participated in a scheme to illegally tamper with footballs. That is clearly cheating.

---

Maybe the reason why he's never been caught is because no one's ever tested or complained about the balls, as the Colts did to the Pats.

---

Or maybe the reason is because Rodgers has never actually used an over-inflated football in a game.

---

It just seems that you're just jealous and looking for anything to use against the Pats, who have been dominant for 15 years.

---

No, like I said in my previous post, the San Antonio Spurs have been dominant for 18 (and going on 19 this year) years (in fact, the Spurs with 5 NBA Championships have had more success than the Patriots), but I don't hate them. The New York Yankees have won the most championships in US pro team sports, but I don't hate them. I don't hate success, when it's rightfully earned. I just hate cheaters and frauds (like Ben Johnson and Rosie Ruiz and Tom Brady), who take shortcuts and cheat and don't earn it.

---

do you consider Aaron Rodgers a cheater because he has over-inflated balls

---

I don't consider Rodgers a cheater because there is no evidence that he has ever actually used inflated footballs in a game. Brady was caught using deflated footballs in a game (and not just any game, but an AFC Championship Game to advance to the Super Bowl) and was proven to have participated in a scheme to illegally tamper with footballs. That is clearly cheating.

---

just hasn't been caught?

---

If Rodgers has never been caught cheating, then we can't assume that he ever cheated just because dumb Patriots' fans like to claim that all other teams cheat do (which is false). It would be like saying that Ben Johnson used steroids so all track and field runners (including Usain Bolt) must use steroids. If Bolt has never tested positive for steroids, then we can't assume that he ever used steroids. Likewise, if Rodgers has never been caught using over-inflated footballs in a game, then we can't assume that he ever cheated just because dumb Patriots' fans want to make an excuse for the Patriots' cheating.

Your points denying Brady's incredible greatness would be more cogent if he still didn't annihilate the Colts in that game, 45-7.

And did the Patriots "cheating" cause errant interceptions in those games, bad fumbles, etc.? Kurt Warner had one of the greatest seasons ever that one year, but was lackluster at best in the Super Bowl. Is that because the Pats somehow cheated (and Spygate BTW was years later)? Was that the reason why Brady threw for 354 yards against Carolina in the next Super Bowl?

---

I don't consider Rodgers a cheater because there is no evidence that he has ever actually used inflated footballs

---

Well, how about the fact that he admitted it?

It just sounds that you're so against the Patriots that it's ridiculous.

And yes, what are you talking about? The Yankees have cheated (in ways that are far more egregious than what Brady ever didwhich I still think the New York Times proved was a ridiculous claim to begin with. Have you ever heard of Alex Rodriguez? Jason Giambi? Roger Clemens? And probably more?

When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

Your points denying Brady's incredible greatness would be more cogent if he still didn't annihilate the Colts in that game, 45-7.

---

And part of the reason for that annihilation was because Brady used illegally-tampered footballs in the 1st half and the Patriots built a double-digit halftime lead by using those illegally-tampered footballs in the 1st half, which resulted in the Colts having to change their game plan of running the ball and controlling the clock and instead having to throw the ball more on the road, which allowed the Patriots to put in more pass defenders and allowed the Patriots' pass rushers to ignore the run and just rush the QB, making it even harder for the Colts to come back.

The argument that the Patriots annihilated the Colts doesn't prove that the Patriots didn't need to cheat to win. It only proves that cheating made it easier for the Patriots to win. I'll try to explain it more clearly.

Let's say an underdog team has a game plan to run the ball, control the clock, be conservative and not take big risks, and play the field position game. But because the opponent cheated and built a double-digit lead by cheating, that forces the underdog team to change their game plan. So instead of being conservative and punting on 4th down and playing the field position game, since they're down by double-digits (due to the opponent cheating), they're forced to go for it on 4th down. If they don't make it on 4th down, then the opponent (who built a double-digit lead by cheating) gets the ball in good field position, making it easier for them to score more points and thus the game quickly turns into a blowout.

That's basically what happened to the Colts. The Patriots' cheating gave them a double-digit halftime lead, which forced the Colts to change their game plan and take more risks, which made it easier for the Patriots to turn the double-digit lead (built by cheating) into an even bigger lead. So the Patriots gained a HUGE illegal advantage from using the illegally-tampered footballs in the 1st half.

---

did the Patriots "cheating" cause errant interceptions in those games, bad fumbles, etc.?

---

Yes, since the Patriots cheating gave them a double-digit halftime lead, it resulted in the Colts changing their game plan and taking more risks, which resulted in more turnovers (because the double-digit lead built by cheating also allowed the Patriots to put in more pass defenders and allowed the Patriots pass rushers to ignore the run and just rush the QB) and made it easier for the Patriots to turn that double-digit lead (built by cheating) into an even bigger lead.

---

Kurt Warner had one of the greatest seasons ever that one year, but was lackluster at best in the Super Bowl.

---

Because the Patriots cheated.

---

Is that because the Pats somehow cheated (and Spygate BTW was years later)?

---

SpyGate wasn't years later. The Patriots were reported cheating in SpyGate by Eric Mangini in Week 1 of the 2007 season. But Patriots' assistant Matt Walsh turned over illegal videotapes to the NFL proving that the Patriots had been illegally filming opponents' signals from the sidelines as early as the 2001 season, when the Patriots won their first Super Bowl by cheating. SpyGate had been on-going for 6+ seasons, during which the Patriots won their first 3 Super Bowls by cheating.

---

which I still think the New York Times proved was a ridiculous claim to begin with.

---

The New York Times hasn't prove anything. Like I wrote in a previous post, all the New York Times did was offer their opinion, which they were never willing to subject to the scrutiny of cross-examination, because they knew their opinion would never hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination. Professor Marlow (a Physics Professor and former Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, the same Princeton University that Albert Einstein was a resident scholar of) not only gave his analysis but also came forward and subjected his analysis to the scrutiny of cross-examination, because he knew his analysis would hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

And it did. Brady's lawyers tried their best to poke holes in Professor Marlow's analysis, but they failed to debunk or discredit Professor Marlow's analysis. So Professor Marlow, whom the highly-respected Ivy League university that Albert Einstein was a resident scholar of made the Chairman of their Department of Physics, conclusively proved that the deflation in the Patriots footballs was caused by human tampering.

---

Have you ever heard of Alex Rodriguez? Jason Giambi? Roger Clemens? And probably more?

---

And I don't like those players either. But those are the actions of individual players. In the case of the Patriots, both the organization (with SpyGate) and the player (Brady with DeflateGate) cheated.

Listen, we're never going to agree on this, I guess. But let me merely just ask you this: You say that you don't like A-Rod, Clemens, etc., you forgive the Yankees because "those were just individuals"? So you basically think that the entire Patriots organization was colluding on these things? And do you honestly think that a lot of Yankees were also juicing in addition to Giambi, Clemens, etc. and, even if not, had no idea that their teammates were?

I still just think that you just cannot stand the Pats no matter what they do. If they do win in a couple of weeks, you'll be shouting about how they must have faked injury reports or somehow had a camera installed in the ceiling the Houston stadium where they surreptitiously stole Atlanta's gameplan, or maybe had mics planted in the Falcons' locker room to overhear secret plays. It just seems that you're so bitter and jealous of the Patriots. Whatever, I suppose will just agree to disagree.

When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

basically think that the entire Patriots organization was colluding on these things?

---

SpyGate involved the head coach (Belichick), some assistant coaches (who received the signals and deciphered them) and staff (like Matt Walsh, who did the illegal filming of the signals), and the team captain and starting QB (Brady, who used the deciphered signals to call audibles at the line of scrimmage).

DeflateGate didn't involve the head coach (the Wells Report cleared Belichick of wrongdoing in DeflateGate, proving that the Wells Report wasn't biased against the Patriots and wasn't on any witchhunt against the Patriots). DeflateGate only involved the starting QB (Brady) and the 2 equipment guys (Jim "The Deflator" McNally and Jastremski).

That's right! Brady got caught using deflated footballs in a game (and not just any game but an AFC Championship Game to advance to the Super Bowl) AND there were incriminating text messages about deflating footballs between the 2 equipment guys AND 1 of the equipment guys calls himself "The Deflator"!

Do you think it's just a coincidence that Brady got caught using deflated footballs in an AFC Championship Game AND 1 of Brady's equipment guys calls himself "The Deflator"? If 3 people who are scheduled to testify against a mob boss are each killed in "mysterious" accidents a week before the trial begins, to you think that's just a coincidence?

Or do you actually believe the BS claim by the Patriots (and their dumb fans) that Jim "The Deflator" McNally called himself "The Deflator" because he was trying to lose weight? How many other people have you heard use the term "Deflator" to mean trying to lose weight?

Speaking of Jim "The Deflator" McNally (the equipment guy who took the Patriots footballs out of the Officials Locker Room area without authorization from the refs and without notifying the refs and into a bathroom outside the Officials Locker Room area even though he could've used the bathrooms inside the Officials Locker Room area and left the footballs in the Officials Locker Room area when using those bathrooms and then later lied about using a urinal in the bathroom that he took the footballs into even though that bathroom doesn't have any urinal), why didn't Brady have Jim "The Deflator" McNally come forward and testify for him at the Arbitration hearing if Brady was innocent?

The Commissioner asked Brady's lawyers if they wanted to keep the record open to allow McNally or Jastremski to testify, but Brady's lawyers declined to call Jim "The Deflator" McNally to testify. The only reason for that is because they were afraid that Jim "The Deflator" McNally would break down under the scrutiny of cross-examination and would admit that Brady ordered him to deflate the footballs. It's the same reason that the New York Times "experts" didn't come forward and testify and subject their analysis to the scrutiny of cross-examination - because they were afraid that their faulty analysis would be debunked and discredited under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

If you're charged with a crime and you have a witness who could testify and prove that you're innocent, wouldn't you call that witness to testify for you? If Brady was innocent, then why didn't Brady have his lawyers call Jim "The Deflator" McNally to testify for him at the Arbitration hearing? Why did the Patriots deny Ted Wells a 2nd interview (which isn't unreasonable, as investigators often have 2nd interviews with witnesses) to ask Jim "The Deflator" McNally about the incriminating text messages, even after Wells offered to drive 75 miles to New Hampshire to interview McNally at his home?

To date, Jim "The Deflator" McNally still hasn't answered the question of why he took the Patriots footballs out of the Officials Locker Room area (without authorization from the refs and without notifying the refs) and took the footballs into a bathroom (which nobody does) outside the Officials Locker Room area when he could've just used the bathrooms inside the Officials Locker Room area and left the footballs in the Officials Locker Room area when using those bathrooms. McNally also still hasn't answered the question of why he lied about using a urinal in the bathroom that he took the footballs into when that bathroom doesn't have any urinal.

---

It just seems that you're so bitter and jealous of the Patriots.

---

Like I said in my previous post, the San Antonio Spurs have been dominant for 18 (and going on 19 this year) years (in fact, the Spurs with 5 NBA Championships have had more success than the Patriots), but I don't hate them. And the Dallas Cowboys have had more success (5 Super Bowl wins and an NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons) than the Patriots.

I don't hate success, when it's rightfully earned. I just hate cheaters and frauds (like Ben Johnson and Rosie Ruiz and Tom Brady), who take shortcuts and cheat and don't earn it.

I hate to sound keep saying things dejavu, BUT THE NEW YORK TIMES investigated this and wrotequite convincinglythat the whole story is ridiculous. No offense, but if someone handed you a gun from Matt Ryan that was smoking, and Tom Brady was dead, you would find any evidence whatsoever to claim that Tom Brady must have committed suicide and framed Matt Ryan. You'd be desperately searching Google for articles or forums to show that this is possible.

Face it: The Patriots are a dynasty, Tom Brady is the best QB ever, the evidence of "cheating" is not even there (and if it was, it's nothing compared to PEDs from your Yankees that you cited before anyways), and you just cannot stand the Pats no matter what they do. They could win 55-0 and you would claim that they somehow managed to cheat this year too.

In your mind, Brady is worse than: Ryan Leaf, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Tim Couch, Heath Shuler, and Andre Ware. In your mind, the ONLY reason why Brady wins all of the time is because he's a cheater (this even two complete years after deflategate even happened).

The Cowboys, meanwhile, have been a disgrace since Aikman retired, which apparently you may still cling to and are OVERLY jealous of the Pats.

When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!

---

THE NEW YORK TIMES investigated this

---

And yet, the New York Times was afraid to come forward and subject their investigation/analysis to the scrutiny of cross-examination. That's because they knew their investigation/analysis wouldn't hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

It's obvious that you don't seem to know how investigations work. I'll try to explain it to you.

When a crime has been committed, the detectives investigate. Their investigation may lead them to a conclusion about who committed the crime and how the crime was committed. If a suspect is charged, the suspect's lawyer may hire his own investigator to investigate. The suspect's investigator may reach a different conclusion than the detectives did. But just because the suspect's investigator reached a different conclusion than the detectives did doesn't mean that the suspect's investigator's conclusion is the correct conclusion.

The detective in charge of the investigation would testify in court about his conclusions and then answer questions under cross-examination. Then the suspect's lawyer may call his investigator to testify in court about his contradictory conclusions, but the investigator would also then have to answer questions under cross-examination.

In the case of DeflateGate, Professor Marlow concluded that weather alone couldn't account for the large amount of deflation in the Patriots' footballs and that the deflation must have been a combination of weather and human tampering. Professor Marlow appeared at the Arbitration hearing and answered questions under cross-examination. Brady's lawyers tried their best to poke holes in Professor Marlow's conclusions during cross-examination but failed to debunk or discredit Professor Marlow's conclusions.

By contrast, the New York Times "experts" offered their conclusion but never came forward to answer questions under cross-examination. That's because they knew their conclusions were faulty and wouldn't hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

So on 1 side, we have Professor Marlow (who a highly-respected Ivy League university that Albert Einstein was a resident scholar of had made the Chairman of their Department of Physics) who not only offered a valid and legitimate conclusion but also came forward and answered questions under the scrutiny of cross-examination and his conclusions held up under the scrutiny of cross-examination. While on the other side, we have so-called "experts" who offered a contradictory conclusion but were afarid to come forward and answer questions under the scrutiny of cross-examination because they were afraid that their conclusion was faulty and wouldn't hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination.

Clearly, Professor Marlow's conclusions (which held up under the scrutiny of cross-examination) are valid and legitimate while the New York Times' conclusions (which were never subjected to the scrutiny of cross-examination because they were afraid it was faulty and wouldn't hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination) are invalid and worthless.

---

Face it: The Patriots are a dynasty, Tom Brady is the best QB ever, the evidence of "cheating" is not even there

---

Fact it: The Patriots are cheaters and frauds, Brady is the biggest cheater and fraud in the NFL history, and as Judge Denny Chin (an unbiased federal appellate court judge who has no affiliation with the NFL and whose job is to review evidence objectively and determine guilt) said on the record in open court "THE EVIDENCE OF BALL TAMPERING IS COMPELLING".

---

In your mind, Brady is worse than: Ryan Leaf, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Tim Couch, Heath Shuler, and Andre Ware.

---

Now you're just making up lies. I'll remind you of what I wrote earlier:

Bob Costas once said that Barry Bonds would still be a great player and 1 of the best players of his era without steroids, but he wouldn't be in the 700+ HR club with Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron if not for steroids. Steroids is what helped Bonds reach Ruthian levels.

Likewise, without cheating Brady would still be a pretty good QB, but he wouldn't have won any Super Bowls without cheating. Cheating is what helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls. Basically, without cheating Brady and the Patriots would just be this generation's version of the 1990s Buffalo Bills, a pretty good team that wasn't good enough to win the Super Bowl.

---

In your mind, the ONLY reason why Brady wins all of the time is because he's a cheater (this even two complete years after deflategate even happened).

---

And another lie. I'll remind you again of what I wrote earlier:

Without steroids, would Bonds still be a member of the 500+ HR club? Yes, most likely. Without steroids, would Bonds still be a member of the 600+ HR club? Maybe. Without steroids, would Bonds have joined Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron in the 700+ HR club? Probably not. Steroids is what helped Bonds reach Ruthian levels.

Similarly, without cheating would Brady and the Patriots still be able to go 16-2? Yes. Without cheating would Brady have joined Joe Montana with 4 Super Bowl wins? Absolutely not. Brady hasn't won even 1 Super Bowl without cheating. Cheating is what helped Brady win 4 Super Bowls and tie Montana's (and Bradshaw's) record.

---

The Cowboys, meanwhile, have been a disgrace since Aikman retired, which apparently you may still cling to and are OVERLY jealous of the Pats.

---

The Cowboys have had more success (5 Super Bowl wins and an NFL-record 20-straight winning seasons) than the Patriots so I'm not jealous at all of a team that has fewer Super Bowl wins, even with cheating, than the Cowboys and have ZERO Super Bowl wins without cheating.

Oh boy, you've really worked ol' AH into a lather!

Of course, everything he has written on this topic has already been destroyed, many times by many people.

It's the same story every time with the same results.

All that effort, and the number of people AH has convinced with his arguments stands at ZERO. Not unlike his dismal prediction record.

AH_fan has turned FAIL into an artform.



Why does a rough and tumble sport of men have such whiny pantywaists for fans?

Fail is not the word for it.This nitwit just named Brady, Manning and Elway to the over-rated list.







Thats a clown question , BRO.



CLOSE the FRIGGEN BORDER ALREADY!!!

---

It just seems that you're so bitter and jealous of the Patriots.

---

That's the typical weak and dumb excuse by Brady supporters to try to justify the Brady's cheating. You keep forgetting the fact that I'm not the only one who believes that Brady is guilty of cheating in DeflateGate.

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the guilty verdict against Brady and re-instated Brady's punishment (which no federal court would ever do if they believed that a defendant was innocent) for cheating in DeflateGate. Judge Denny Chin even said on the record in open court that "THE EVIDENCE OF BALL TAMPERING IS COMPELLING".

Judge Chin is an unbiased federal appellate court judge who has no affiliation with the NFL. Judge Chin made his decision based on an objective review of the evidence (just like he does in every other case) and not on any bitterness or jealously so that debunks your weak and dumb excuse that anyone who believes Brady is guilty of cheating must be bitter and jealous of the Patriots.

Judge Chin is the judge who sentenced Bernie Madoff to a 150-year prison term for fraud. So Judge Chin knows a fraud when he sees one, and Judge Chin could see from his objective review of the evidence that Brady was a fraud.