To those fans who booed

[mcsully]

I didn't boo, but I understand where you're coming from. I've been a season ticket holder for 10 years myself and I always get a kick out of these lecture threads. Everyone who goes to the games sucks and everyone who watches at home are hard core.

Thank you.. Very few understand.. Esp the homers here who have 10k posts and think they are BB Junior..

Its funny reading some of your posts about "do I boo'd at work" or "you suck as a fan".. Fact is if people/workers make constant mistakes in their work enviroment, and the customer feels the effect.. The customer has every right to voice their opinion.. My opinion was during the 1st half of the game I felt there were to many mental errors on the players part.. And since I'm paying customer, I have every right to boo a bad play.. There is a difference between booing a player, team and a play.. I hope you guys realize that when you watch the games at home..

 

[Fixit]

...and think they are BB Junior..

Irony, party of two, your table is ready.

 

[Haley]

I didn't much care for the booing however, I do wonder if it did provide some motivation for Brady. Sometimes he seems to perform well when the chips are down and everyone is against him. Angry Brady is much better to have out there than Frustrated Brady.

 

[reflexblue]

I have a problem with those who boo at the game and the imbaciles that come on here during the game and do the same thing. This team has Four rookies and Two second year guys starting on defense. On the offense theres been a lot of change, its not like this is Indy where the same players have been working together for years. In yesterdays game the pats were down THREE points to one of the Best teams in foot ball and people at the game and on here were booing.... WTF is that. In the play off game last year people were booing, i think in that game they had a right to. The team played like dogs

 

[eagle eye]

If the crowd is going to as loud and animated as they were yesterday then I have no problem with the booing. If the crowd is a quiet one then I don't think they have any right to boo.

 

[shmessy]

They were too deep in their own territory to risk it. They were getting the ball back anyway. The wind was blowing. An INT and three or seven at that point would have been a back breaker after staying close despite what Brady called a bad first half. It was the right decision and those who booed don't understand the game. If thats' :bricks:, then I'm sorry, but you are wrong.

I only heard the booing one time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the fans not booing the team, but booing Belichick for letting 28 seconds drip of the clock before calling a timeout giving the team zero chance of getting the ball in FG range at the end of the half?

I couldn't believe that, even Nantz and Simms (who are the biggest BB ballwashers on earth) questioned it.

It seemed that BB was asleep at the switch. I took it that the crowd was trying to wake him up and get his attention more than anything about a general booing for the team's performance. They could have had the ball back with almost a minute to go. Perhaps a chant of "Wake -Up" would have been better, but fans drink before the game and aren't being paid to be sharp and quick, like the coaching staff is.

If you're going to call a TO why wait the 28 seconds? That made zero sense.

 

[Synovia]

I only heard the booing one time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the fans not booing the team, but booing Belichick for letting 28 seconds drip of the clock before calling a timeout giving the team zero chance of getting the ball in FG range at the end of the half?

I couldn't believe that, even Nantz and Simms (who are the biggest BB ballwashers on earth) questioned it.

It seemed that BB was asleep at the switch. I took it that the crowd was trying to wake him up and get his attention more than anything about a general booing for the team's performance. They could have had the ball back with almost a minute to go.

If you're going to call a TO why wait the 28 seconds? That made zero sense.

This.

I'm a customer. Its not my job to make Brady feel good. Its the team's job to win games and entertain me. When the team decided they weren't going to run a 2 minute drill with 1:20 left, that wasn't entertaining at all.

Its your job as a fan to question stuff like that.

 

[upstater1]

This.

I'm a customer. Its not my job to make Brady feel good. Its the team's job to win games and entertain me. When the team decided they weren't going to run a 2 minute drill with 1:20 left, that wasn't entertaining at all.

Its your job as a fan to question stuff like that.

You should find a new team to root for.

Clearly, Belichick sneers at your requirements for entertainment. He just wants to win, he doesn't care about entertainment.

I'll say this again: it's not about Brady being intercepted, it's about Brady throwing an incomplete pass and the Raven having all their timeouts. Then Zoltan kicks from the end zone and the next thing you know, the Ravens have the ball at the 50 yard line with 45 seconds left.

That's the concern in that position, much more so than an interception.

Go into the half, down by 3, make your adjustments on defense, and come out for the second half.

The Patriots won the game. I can care less if the game was entertaining.

 

[emoney_33]

Youre a disgrace

It was embarrassing, sure you may not agree with every decision but to boo your team? Nantz, Simms and half the NE team couldn't believe it

You dont deserve this team

Fans only have two ways to talk to the team, cheers and boos. Yes and No. Booing was just disagreeing with the decision to NOT call a timeout with about :58 and then to kneel it into OT. Sure the coaches were -probably- right, but I don't blame the fans for disagreeing with that decision.

 

[Lampshade]

This.

I'm a customer. Its not my job to make Brady feel good. Its the team's job to win games and entertain me. When the team decided they weren't going to run a 2 minute drill with 1:20 left, that wasn't entertaining at all.

Its your job as a fan to question stuff like that.

They did win.

Why boo them?

 

[ALP]

i agree,

the 12th man isnt there just to support the team and get the other team to make mistakes

its also there to take the other 11 men out of their respective slumbers and wake them the hell up

the team came out better in the second half no? maybe the boos did their job

 

[Synovia]

They did win.

Why boo them?

Who says the booing didn't help? They certainly were more urgent in the 2nd half.


I don't get paid to be a cheerleader, so I don't have to cheer when they're doing something stupid.

 

[mcsully]

Irony, party of two, your table is ready.

You missed the message then..

 

[Lampshade]

Who says the booing didn't help? They certainly were more urgent in the 2nd half.


I don't get paid to be a cheerleader, so I don't have to cheer when they're doing something stupid.

Why didn't you boo louder during the playoff loss to the Ravens?

 

[Major **********]

Why did they even bother take the TO at the end of the half, after letting 20+ seconds run off the clock, if they had already decided to take a knee? That sequence of events made absolutely no sense to me at all.
Also for those who say it was too risky, explain how is it any riskier that what they did at the end of SB36 with, what was then "essentially", a rookie QB. They got the ball back with 1:21 left at their own 17 yard line and no TO left. And that was for all the marbles. You EFF up there and its over. Yet you're afraid to put you 10 year all pro veteran QB out on the filed at the end of a regular season half (with 2 TO left) when you know you're getting the ball back at the beginning of the 3rd quarter.
Patriots of the early and mid 2000s get 3 points minimum out of it. I have no idea what yesterdays Pats were doing.

 

[upstater1]

Why did they even bother take the TO at the end of the half, after letting 20+ seconds run off the clock, if they had already decided to take a knee? That sequence of events made absolutely no sense to me at all.
Also for those who say it was too risky, explain how is it any riskier that what they did at the end of SB36 with, what was then "essentially", a rookie QB. They got the ball back with 1:21 left at their own 17 yard line and no TO left. And that was for all the marbles. You EFF up there and its over. Yet you're afraid to put you 10 year all pro veteran QB out on the filed at the end of a regular season half (with 2 TO left) when you know you're getting the ball back at the beginning of the 3rd quarter.
Patriots of the early and mid 2000s get 3 points minimum out of it. I have no idea what yesterdays Pats were doing.

This isn't rocket science folks. It's not difficult to explain. Baltimore had timeouts. So, you wind the clock down, take your shot, and if you convert the first down, then you're in business, and you still have 35 seconds and all your timeouts to move it 30 more yards for a 50 yard field goal.

BUT, if you fail, you kick the ball downfield, and you leave Baltimore with 25 seconds (let's say at the 50 yard line) to do their damage.

If you take the TO immediately and you fail, Baltimore has over a minute left from say the 50. Big difference.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Why did they even bother take the TO at the end of the half, after letting 20+ seconds run off the clock, if they had already decided to take a knee? That sequence of events made absolutely no sense to me at all.
Also for those who say it was too risky, explain how is it any riskier that what they did at the end of SB36 with, what was then "essentially", a rookie QB. They got the ball back with 1:21 left at their own 17 yard line and no TO left. And that was for all the marbles. You EFF up there and its over. Yet you're afraid to put you 10 year all pro veteran QB out on the filed at the end of a regular season half (with 2 TO left) when you know you're getting the ball back at the beginning of the 3rd quarter.
Patriots of the early and mid 2000s get 3 points minimum out of it. I have no idea what yesterdays Pats were doing.

The difference between those two situations was the Greatest Show on Turf had regained ALL the offensive momentum in that game in the last quarter. Had they won the toss we'd have one less Lombardi, if any... The NEP defense was gassed. Yesterday Bill trusted his defense that got stronger as the game progressed to make a stop because they had been making them in the second half and consistently throughout the 4th quarter even as the offense continued to gain ground while sputtering...

The one thing majority of fans who post here have in common it's that they generally have no idea what BB or this team is ever doing unless they're pitching a shutout or scoring a 40 burger...and entertaining them.

 

[Synovia]

Why didn't you boo louder during the playoff loss to the Ravens?

Because the Ravens were a better team in that game. They flat out outplayed the Patriots.


This game was about the coach giving away a drive. I don't get upset when they get outplayed. I get upset when they don't try.

 

[Synovia]

This isn't rocket science folks. It's not difficult to explain. Baltimore had timeouts. .

Baltimore has timeouts and is giving you the ball. They're not going to stop the clock because stopping the clock gives you more time.


If time on the clock had been to the advantage of Baltimore, they would have called timeout.

 

[spacecrime]

Well, to play the contrarian role, I'd argue that the Pats offense was sputtering throughout the 1st half;

That's not contrarian???? Everyone agrees that the Pats weren't on fire in the first half.

The question is, Do you boo your team in this situation.

The answer is yes, if you are a spoiled fan, or cannot accept that other teams earn their paychecks too, and that the Ravens are one of the best teams in the NFL right now.

At the time of booing, there were only about 4 teams in the NFL with only one loss. Booing one of them in the first half is simply stupid.

If you want to support your team, show it. If your goal is to discourage them and take away home field advantage, then boo.

If you think booing in this situation is a good thing, then the word is not contrarian.