Prediction: This team will be more dominant than 2007

[Patspsycho]

 

[CheeseMonkeys]

I think our offense can match 2007. Brady should be completely fresh and if Welker continues to amaze with his recovery then he should be back to his old self. Moss is on his contract year and he still has plenty of gas in him. Edelman is no longer a Welker clone, he is defining himself as a player and will have a huge impact this year alongside Welker and Moss. Our TE corps is completely renewed. Gronk should be a monster blocking and receiving while Hernadez will be causing havoc for most defenses. We also have Price and Tate who were both 3rd rounders with potential as receivers.

The Running Back situation is questionable but Laurence Maroney has to break through eventually, right? If Fred Taylor and Morris can stay fresh they could also have an impact. Taylor looked great last preseason game, BTW. BJGE is also someone who can potentially have an impact although we have yet to see much from him. We don't have to talk about Kevin Faulk because we all know that he will continue to impress even at his age. All in all, I am feeling good about this group.

Defense is where I'm not certain. If we can stop the run and rush the passer then things should be alright. We have a young secondary that seems to be improving. I think this defense is still a top defense in the NFL, but with Ty Warren out our defensive line could be pretty weak. Lets hope not. Damn, I can't wait for this season to start.

 

[Satchboogie3]

If healthy, this team could be very very good. I'm just nervous about injuries. After watching the injury bug destroy the Red Sox this year, I think it's only fair that the Pats have a nice, healthy season. Maybe the bug can move down to our Southern Neighbors.

 

[groundgame]

The 2007 edition of the NE Patriots peaked too early.
Ideally it would be better to take a few lumps early and
peak at the end of the season.

The regular season game v. Giants in 2007: I was half-hoping Pats would lose that game, to take the pressure off and get the loss out of the way.

 

[emoney_33]

I would contend, the theoretical most dominant team of all time would be so balanced that no team could shut it down.

[That doesn't mean it wouldn't lose. In season losses are much different than playoff losses, which are exits.]

There is no such thing as a 'theoretical' most dominant team of all time. The best of all time means the best of all the ones that have already played, not a fantasy team you can create in your mind.

When your claim to dominance is beating some teams 50-14 for example (not an actual score) are the last 35 points indicative of dominance, given that there is no reward for total points scored, outside of a possible tie breaker? Even a tie breaker likely doesn't come into play because, if you are considered to be dominant, you probably have enough wins to avoid that outcome.

Actually, that's precisely what dominance is... There's no extra benefit from beating a team by 3 vs 50, but beating them by 50 is dominating them while beating them by 3 is not.

To me a dominant team can beat you playing their game, your game or some other. They are versatile, so virtually indefensible. Could that 2007 team beat you with defense, grind it out on the ground, or any other variation besides their established passing offense? Don't know. They didn't prove they could in 2007.

I suppose you slept through the playoffs too, when Maroney ran for 122 yards in consecutive games, Brady only threw for 262 and 209 yards while the Chargers couldn't score a TD. Yep, the 2007 Patriots were nothing but fluff and passing game :/. Stop letting the disappointment skew your views of what really was an incredible team.

 

[AzPatsFan]

In all the nostalgia everyone forgets that this Patriots edition doesn't need to be the equal or better than the 2007 edition.

All it needs to be is better than the 2009 edition, which won the AFCE division and won 10 games. Does any one doubt that it already is better, merely from the rookie to sophomore maturity. Not to mention the Defensive additions at ILB, secondary and Defensive line? Or the Offensive improvements at WR, TE, and reserve QB?

 

[RayClay]

There is no such thing as a 'theoretical' most dominant team of all time. The best of all time means the best of all the ones that have already played, not a fantasy team you can create in your mind.

All right, without even searching the greatest teams of all time, I'll compare the running game to 2004. Had Corey Dillon been on the 2007 team and been used, we simply would have beaten the Giants. We had a dominant running game in 2004, nowhere near in 2007.

Actually, that's precisely what dominance is... There's no extra benefit from beating a team by 3 vs 50, but beating them by 50 is dominating them while beating them by 3 is not.

That's a different type of dominance. That's BDSM.

I suppose you slept through the playoffs too, when Maroney ran for 122 yards in consecutive games, Brady only threw for 262 and 209 yards while the Chargers couldn't score a TD. Yep, the 2007 Patriots were nothing but fluff and passing game :/. Stop letting the disappointment skew your views of what really was an incredible team.

If you want to say 2007 Maroney was as dominant as 2004 Corey Dillon, be my guest.

 

[emoney_33]

All right, without even searching the greatest teams of all time, I'll compare the running game to 2004. Had Corey Dillon been on the 2007 team and been used, we simply would have beaten the Giants. We had a dominant running game in 2004, nowhere near in 2007.

How does this comment have ANYTHING to do with what you quoted me saying?

That's a different type of dominance. That's BDSM.

So far your definition of dominance is winning the superbowl, because the 2007 Patriots did just about everything except for win that last game.

If you want to say 2007 Maroney was as dominant as 2004 Corey Dillon, be my guest.

I never once said that, go back and read YOUR statement that I quoted and responded to. You point blank said the Patriots of 2007 ONLY won with their passing game. Honestly, you have not responded to anything I've said with this last post. I'm still curious as to how 2004 Dillon has anything to do with this discussion.

The most dominant TEAM of all time has to EXIST. It can't be a fantasy team, you can't pick and choose a unit from different squads, the ENTIRE TEAM has to have existed. Obviously you can find at least one weakness in every single team ever to have played, that has NOTHING to do with what was being discussed. No one ever claimed the 2007 Patriots were perfect, but they sure as hell were one of the most dominant teams in the history of the game.

It's quite clear that you still think that no great team can ever lose a superbowl, no matter the circumstances, which is as ridiculous as trying to argue that the SB winner is pre-determined.

 

[RayClay]

How does this comment have ANYTHING to do with what you quoted me saying?

It's not theoretical. Corey Dillon was a real player and a force that changed how defenses had to play you.

The 2004 Patriots was a real team, a dominant team that could beat you in many ways, for instance if you shut down their passing game.

They were better on defense and the running game. Therefore, since defenses have two weeks to try and stop you, they were a more dominant team, because they could dominate even if you eliminated one aspect of their game.

Of course i could list a ton of teams that were more dominant due to balance than the 2007 Pats, but one will suffice.

 

[patsfan-1982]

do the pats have the same level talent at receiver as they did in 2007 i would say yes... but teams played Brady, and that offense scared for most of the season once teams found out if they can get in Bradys face he will become human they stoped being scared of that offense and that team got more and more predictable as the season went on by the end of the year it was Moss, Welker, and that's it just like last year.



if the OL can hold up and Brady, stops forceing deep balls into double coverage and mix the TE in more and more short throws to all the receivers not just Welker, they can put up big numbers in the passing game but not 50 TD's and a 16-0 season.

 

[emoney_33]

It's not theoretical. Corey Dillon was a real player and a force that changed how defenses had to play you.

The 2004 Patriots was a real team, a dominant team that could beat you in many ways, for instance if you shut down their passing game.

They were better on defense and the running game. Therefore, since defenses have two weeks to try and stop you, they were a more dominant team, because they could dominate even if you eliminated one aspect of their game.

So you are arguing that the 2004 team was more dominant than the 2007 team? Great team for certain, but I disagree it was more dominant than the 2007 team. More rounded? Certainly. More dominant? Nope.

Of course i could list a ton of teams that were more dominant due to balance than the 2007 Pats, but one will suffice.

You certainly have a different definition of the word "dominant" than 99% of the population. I never will argue the 2007 Patriots were the most balanced team of all time. They were the best offense of all time and one of the most dominant overall of all time.

It's funny because if that ref blows the whistle and the Patriots go 19-0, even though that team would be 100% the same, you'd be singing a far different tune.

 

[captain stone]

The Pats won three Super Bowls by three points apiece. We could have just as easily had a whistle or a single play go the other way in each of those playoff runs and we don't have *any* Lombardi's.

But more to the point, the Pats lost to the Giants, and the only way that could have happened (as I argued with my friends before the game) was if all three of the following things happened:

1. The Patriots had to play a subpar game. If they played their best game, nothing else would matter as the Pats would cruise. But they didn't. They played, by their standards, pretty poorly.

2. The Giants had to play an excellent game. And they did.

3. The Giants had to get the breaks (a fumble bouncing to their guy, a bad call by the ref, whatever). They did. Other than the one Pats INT, every break went the Giants' way, including several crucial plays during that last drive.

This takes nothing away from the Giants, because they did their part - they played an excellent game. It was out of their control that there were highly questionable calls (no holding on the hail mary helmet play) or mistakes made by the Pats (Asante not intercepting that ball).

But here's the key: the Patriots had many, many opportunities to win that game, regardless of any single call. They failed to do that. The Pats had the opportunity to impose their will on that game and, except, really, for one drive in the 4th quarter, they did not do it. They played poorly and allowed the Giants to hang around, thus making it possible for a bad call or a bad bounce or a miracle play to beat them. The 1989 49ers or the 1985-86 Bears never allowed a playoff game to get to that point. They hammered the crap out of teams in dominant fashion. The Pats had the ability to do that, but they didn't. And it cost them the NFL title.

QFT.

Had any one of the see-no-evil zebras called any one of a number of holding infractions on 3rd/5, then all that would've happened is, the jints would've still had the ball; the d/d would just have been 3rd/15 instead. The game would cert. NOT have been over, yet.

As for the OP: there is no way - none whatsoever - with the same, but older & deteriorating "injury-prone, try-hard stiffs" at OL, and the 3rd-string & worse crap that is OLB, that the Pats will be anything even remotely resembling dominant. They'll be fortunate just to make the POs at all.

 

[emoney_33]

QFT.

Had any one of the see-no-evil zebras called any one of a number of holding infractions on 3rd/5, then all that would've happened is, the jints would've still had the ball; the d/d would just have been 3rd/15 instead. The game would cert. NOT have been over, yet.

4th & 15 with "momentum" on the NYG 34, but yeah I guess you have a point... It wouldn't have been over but the Pats would have been in a much better position than 1st and 10 on their own 24.

 

[GrogansArmy]

I think people are starting to think it, but very few really want to say it, so I'm saying it: this squad is going to be even better than 2007.

Thanks for jinxing us! Ass!

 

[AzPatsFan]

QFT.

Had any one of the see-no-evil zebras called any one of a number of holding infractions on 3rd/5, then all that would've happened is, the jints would've still had the ball; the d/d would just have been 3rd/15 instead. The game would cert. NOT have been over, yet.

As for the OP: there is no way - none whatsoever - with the same, but older & deteriorating "injury-prone, try-hard stiffs" at OL, and the 3rd-string & worse crap that is OLB, that the Pats will be anything even remotely resembling dominant. They'll be fortunate just to make the POs at all.

Stone,

You have to be the dumbest "Fan" I have ever seen or heard.

Please, Pleeze, adopt another Team and go spread your ever present, interminable, and perpetual, Whining with those "lucky" fellows. The JESTers are a perpetual, Sad sack, franchise.

Wouldn't you really rather revel in their constant mediocrity. It would give you a vent to spill your endless forecasts of Doom and actually have a chance of being right, once in a while...

 

[Kontradiction]

I think Captain Stone is a gimmick poster.

 

[mesoslo]

if the patriots offense stays true to form, the defense will have a lot easier time. So its possible for the patriots to sweep the season.

 

[TBradyOwnsYou]

 

[Off The Grid]

The funny thing ~ from my perspective ~ is that that team's dominance was predicated on an overwhelming Passing Game that masked not only an aging and vulnerable Defense...but a pedestrian Running Game.

1990 Miners, anyone?

THAT team, too, went LONG into the season with its Quest for Immortality intact.

***

To describe this team as having THAT kind of potential, in light of our SEVERE vulnerabilities at Defensive End and OutSide MidFielder...is NUTS.

But, with a MONSTROUS wave of young Talent working its way in, ere the last 2 years, we are only a few pieces away from a truly AMAZING young Crew...And there's every reason to think we could lock those peices IN, in the next 20 months: OLB, DE, and O Line...

And, if SO...a 2012 - 2014 run at a Trifecta...AND a 19-0...will be IN PLAY.

 

[Patspsycho]

The funny thing ~ from my perspective ~ is that that team's dominance was predicated on an overwhelming Passing Game that masked not only an aging and vulnerable Defense...but a pedestrian Running Game.

1990 Miners, anyone?

THAT team, too, went LONG into the season with its Quest for Immortality intact.

***

To describe this team as having THAT kind of potential, in light of our SEVERE vulnerabilities at Defensive End and OutSide MidFielder...is NUTS.

But, with a MONSTROUS wave of young Talent working its way in, ere the last 2 years, we are only a few pieces away from a truly AMAZING young Crew...And there's every reason to think we could lock those peices IN, in the next 20 months: OLB, DE, and O Line...

And, if SO...a 2012 - 2014 run at a Trifecta...AND a 19-0...will be IN PLAY.