I believe last week's game was harder than it looked. - New England Patriots Forums

JSn · 09-12-2008, 10:07 PM

These nitwits saying last weeks win was a joke seem to consistently ignore the stress factor going on. Brady went down early and never re-appeared. Moss admitted to watching the tunnel.

My question is this: do you think the mental toll of the uncertainty over Tom Brady made that game harder than it was on paper, regardless of who was QB?

I was amazed they stayed focused enough to win. Cassel did not play poorly despite having super-short notice about taking the field, Moss played solidly - more-so with Matt than Tom, and everyone executed a pretty clean game in spite of this mental "sliver".

Poll shortly.

emoney_33 · 09-12-2008, 10:15 PM

I think the combination of a lot things made it "harder" than it "should" have been.

KC is a young team, you don't really know what to expect and there isn't a lot of tape on them. The Brady injury definitely effected things, probably as much in offensive coaching/play calling as in the players morale.

The two fumbles also effected the game as well as the fact that it is week 1 and no one is in full game shape at this point in time.

AzPatsFan · 09-12-2008, 11:15 PM

Yes it was a a tough game.

But there was some good signs in the game.

The backup QB, that all but Belchick and very few fans like me, thought was nothing but an abject bum, ended up with a QB rating of 116.0 in his first major exposure, and nobody seemed to notice.

The questionable Pats O-line, opened holes for a 127 yard per game rushing pace. That is usually a recipe for winning football.

The Defense with a revamped rush, losing Rosey and adding AD outside, got 4 sacks. Projected over 16 games that is a 64 sack a year total. Somewhat better than the second best in the league mid 49s, that Pats had in 2007.

More than just Brady went down. One QB was knocked out for KC, Brodey Croyel went down to the Pat's pass rush.

Mayo started and played every snap at ILB. He was not a detriment as a rookie.

The secondary that was a cause of so much apprehension looked to be OK, except that Rodney was cosnsitently slow, in covering Gonzalez. But so is everybody else in the league.

***DarrylS*** · 09-13-2008, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzPatsFan

Yes it was a a tough game.

But there was some good signs in the game.

The backup QB, that all but Belchick and very few fans like me, thought was nothing but an abject bum, ended up with a QB rating of 116.0 in his first major exposure, and nobody seemed to notice.

The questionable Pats O-line, opened holes for a 127 yard per game rushing pace. That is usually a recipe for winning football.

The Defense with a revamped rush, losing Rosey and adding AD outside, got 4 sacks. Projected over 16 games that is a 64 sack a year total. Somewhat better than the second best in the league mid 49s, that Pats had in 2007.

More than just Brady went down. One QB was knocked out for KC, Brodey Croyel went down to the Pat's pass rush.

Mayo started and played every snap at ILB. He was not a detriment as a rookie.

The secondary that was a cause of so much apprehension looked to be OK, except that Rodney was cosnsitently slow, in covering Gonzalez. But so is everybody else in the league.

A breath of fresh air, the glass is half full...

***PatsDeb*** · 09-13-2008, 06:27 AM

The win was definitely harder than it looked. Although the crowd at Gillette gets maligned on here all the time, it does provide a lot of momentum for the team, and when Tom went down, the air was sucked right out of the stadium (more than usual!!) for a while. Our team kept playing and brought the crowd back into it. They weren't quitting, so neither did the crowd.