Anyone else MORE optimistic after last night's loss to 49ers?

[mayoclinic]

I'm not more optimistic, but I'm not worried either. Much of what we saw last night is correctable.

Yup.

More optimistic? No. Coming out flat in a big game and making a bunch of sloppy mistakes doesn't increase my optimism, any way you slice it.

Less optimistic? No. Showing the resiliency that they did, and being pissed off going into the playoffs should compensate for the loss of seed, IF BB can fix some of the problems and get people health.

 

[hambone1818]

I hate to be a downer, but last night's loss was huge. I'm not talking about morale, I'm talking about the playoffs. Yes, we have owned Denver's defense, but I would be close 100% sure we'd beat Denver at home, and I'm not optimistic about traveling to a one of the toughest stadiums in the NFL in January to face a top-5 defense led by one of the best QBs of all-time on a week's rest. The Brady-Manning rivalry is almost always won by the home team, and I can already foresee the 2 BS PI calls Manning gets, with even a 30 point lead feeling like it's coming down to the last play.

Sorry, but there isn't much rah-rah here. Glad to see the Pats had fight in them, but ultimately that L could be very costly.

@Denver is now the likely outcome (provided the Pats get through their WC game, if it came to that), but I'm not worried about them. When's the last time they faced a top defense? A top offense? Baltimore is a shell of themselves. Cincy was playing bad football when those two teams played. And it was a long time ago but NE/Houston/Atl all handled the Broncos, those are the three most challenging games on their schedule and they were all losses. I'm not terribly impressed with this run against SD, KC, Oakland and the like.

I like to look for silver linings in losses--keeps me sane--and I'll agree wholeheartedly with everyone who said they were dreadful for over half the game. But we saw the most dominant team in football for 25 minutes last night, and the offense is downright scary when you add in Gronk. How different would it have been had Willis been covering Gronk, with Hernandez wrecking havoc against anyone else? How much more confident are you with a run game being set up by Gronk on the outside? The Pats made way, way too many mistakes last night and it cost them the game...but I'd rather they lay a stinker in the regular season and tighten things up for the playoffs.

 

[DarrylS]

4 lost turnovers, when that happens few games if any are won....

Remember Kerry Byrnes(sp) from football outsiders speak about this several times..

If we do not turn the ball over I am optimistic.. if we do much less so.

 

[ensoul]

How can you be? Obviously I am getting ahead of myself but instead of the road to the superbowl being: A bye week, home game against Denver then a game in texas it is going to be: Wild card here, away in Denver and Away in Texas. That loss significatory diminished their chances of making it to the SB.

Edit: I obviously don't believe in moral victories either.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Very optimistic considering Gronkowski will be back shortly. As bad as they played they still had their chances.

Gronkowski=better running game. Harder to play man defense. Hernandez in softer coverage. Or Welker and Lloyd in softer coverage. Oh yeah, and Gronk himself, the Calvin Johnson of mismatches himself-TE. Gronk Smash!! Puny humans!!!!

 

[Reckedtrek]

I had this game as loss in my season predictions, but I have us beating them in the big game. So I am sad they lost, but not any less optimistic. I would have been crazy upset if the game ended with a score like the first half. But now we know what we know and next time we will be expecting a tough game and not expecting just to roll. Onwards and upwards no sense looking back now.

This is how I see it. I had us at 12-4 and felt that we would be lucky to win both Houston and SF games.

The team played one of it's worst games of the season, put itself in a huge hole, and despite some really sucky wether (I was there, and it was miserable weather) came back scoring 28 unanswered points against SF's D to make it anyone's game with about 6 or 7 minutes left in the game.

RE the playoffs, the Pats could have really used this one, but there are two weeks left. As unlikely as it is, Denver could have a mind melt and lose one. If they don't the Pats will have to play a first round game and likely play Denver at home. And even if they do that, many around here will still say they were lucky and aren't as good as their performance would indicate.

Am I happy the Pats lost? unlike some "fans" around here, no I am not. But I'm not going to let a bunch of CL's tell me I should expect failure at any moment.

 

[TruthSeeker]

MORE optimistic ? No, our Defense is still our achilles heel. 41 points against THAT offense ? I really think our Defense is 1 year away from being a Super Bowl Defense. We need to find guys who can rush the passer (been saying that for how many years ?). A good pass rush hides our weakness in the secondary, which is getting a little stronger.

Offensively, to score 34 points against the best defense in football (SF only allows 14 points per game), and to score 42 against the Texans, WITHOUT Gronk ? Wow, that has me very optimistic. Offensively we are there, defensively, that's gonna hold us back until it's addressed more.

 

[hambone1818]

4 lost turnovers, when that happens few games if any are won....

Remember Kerry Byrnes(sp) from football outsiders speak about this several times..

If we do not turn the ball over I am optimistic.. if we do much less so.

Speaking of Byrnes and CHFF, they printed an article a week or two dissecting fumbles vs. fumbles lost, and found it was largely a luck factor...seeing as how SF lost just one of their six fumbles, and the Pats lost both of theirs, I'd say this was a wholly unluck game for the Pats in general. How about the Smith 'interception' of that bobbled ball? How about PI on Talib (ticky-tack, imo), a 3rd down call that led to a TD? How about no PI on whoever was covering Lloyd in the EZ early in the game, again a 3rd down call that this time took away points from the Pats (most likely).

Maybe it's not the right thing to say--more optimistic. But I was very worried about this game, especially without Gronk. SF has an incredibly physical, strong defense that I thought would wreck havoc on the Pats O-line. That was largely the case in the first half but the Pats showed they can torch the Niners even without Gronk. I guess it's more fair for me to say I'm not more optimistic but that I was encouraged by the second half play, and now more than ever I think the Pats are without question the best team in the AFC.

 

[SVN]

Dont mind the loss as much as the prospect of going to denver with this defense. Our odds of a SB just got a bit tougher. I think this helps houston most.

 

[SVN]

MORE optimistic ? No, our Defense is still our achilles heel. 41 points against THAT offense ? I really think our Defense is 1 year away from being a Super Bowl Defense. We need to find guys who can rush the passer (been saying that for how many years ?). A good pass rush hides our weakness in the secondary, which is getting a little stronger.

Offensively, to score 34 points against the best defense in football (SF only allows 14 points per game), and to score 42 against the Texans, WITHOUT Gronk ? Wow, that has me very optimistic. Offensively we are there, defensively, that's gonna hold us back until it's addressed more.

well...49ers didnt drive the lenght of the field for at least 3 of those TD's but yes,our D is still suspect right now esp if we have to play on the road.

 

[condon84]

What last night told me is that we're still vulnerable against a team that will spread us out on defense and attack the deep end. Kapernick missed on a few opportunities, but also connected on a couple. Against someone like Manning or Rogers, or Eli, those missed opportunities might not be "missed".

 

[hambone1818]

MORE optimistic ? No, our Defense is still our achilles heel. 41 points against THAT offense ? I really think our Defense is 1 year away from being a Super Bowl Defense. We need to find guys who can rush the passer (been saying that for how many years ?). A good pass rush hides our weakness in the secondary, which is getting a little stronger.

Offensively, to score 34 points against the best defense in football (SF only allows 14 points per game), and to score 42 against the Texans, WITHOUT Gronk ? Wow, that has me very optimistic. Offensively we are there, defensively, that's gonna hold us back until it's addressed more.

How many points do they give up if turnovers and bad coverage didn't result in EIGHT possessions starting inside Pats territory, and four of them inside the 30? Take away a ticky-tack penalty against Talib and they punt there, rather than score a TD. Take away the turnover on downs at the end of the game and that's three more points. Take away the fake punt (you better believe the Pats ST will be working on covering that in the future) and that's another drive stopped.

The fact is, the Pats turned the ball over five times (once on downs), all in NE territory. Every team in the league is giving up big points in a game like that. No, you can't just 'take away' those plays...but the defense played alot better than the score indicated, imo. And that stretch in the 3rd and 4the quarters was dominating.

 

[BrickPat]

I'm not "more optmistic". I too was impressed with the furious comeback but their road to the SB just got that much tougher if they have to go to Denver and Houston. Of course they have the talent to win both but a bye and higher seeding would've made me (more) confident.

 

[PatriotSeven]

What last night told me is that we're still vulnerable against a team that will spread us out on defense and attack the deep end. Kapernick missed on a few opportunities, but also connected on a couple. Against someone like Manning or Rogers, or Eli, those missed opportunities might not be "missed".

I know a lot of people were ticked off with our secondary and how sometimes it seemed we couldn't cover everyone.

I always have to keep in mind that we can't defend the spread option like other types of offenses. That's what the spread option is designed to do. Give them a 1 man advantage compared to your typical NFL offense.

We had to commit, either through scheming, or 1 extra man to covering Colin's rushing so it takes away from the additional help we can give our secondary. It puts that much more pressure on your secondary not just your run defense. There will be situations where they will exploit match ups and are practically uncoverable at times. This is what happened in Seattle as well.

But compared to what I have seen other offenses like this do to other defenses when looking at Cam Newton, RG3, etc, where they almost ALWAYS have 2-3 plays a game with a receiver wiiiiiide open, I think our guys did a pretty decent job.

It's a tough, tough offense to defend, especially with NFL defenses currently having to deal with 2 types of offenses. It wasn't Tebow back there with McCoy running the 49ers offense.

I honestly think that the best way to defend this style of offense is turnovers and outscoring them, or catching the QB with a big hit, because it really is hard to shut them down for a full 60 minutes when they have an accurate passer, and a good coach who can take full advantage of what the spread option can do. In the future we'll have to draft players to stop this type of offense because these rookies and first year starters will only get better.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

No, we took a big step back on D. 4 fatal breakdowns: The Moss TD (they had 2 guys behind our D), The TD to the backup TE who was wiiiiiide open, The Crabtree TD on Arrington, the should have been TD to Vernon Davis who was just as wide open as the others if not more but Kap overthrew him. It's not a good sign and hopefully they get back on the right track defensively. That was the whole key to this year's team was they were supposed to have been playing much better on D which they were until last night. If we revert to a secondary who gives up multiple huge plays a game it's going to be very tough to go all the way with that.

You got to realize that SF is one of the top 3 teams in the NFL. They are as complete a team there is - offense, defense, coaching - they are good. The pats will not face this caliber a team until the SB. They got torched on D but no one in the AFC has a roster nearly as talented as SF. I believe this defense is good enough to take this team to the SB and if we have a rematch against SF we can take them. We did't have our best offensive player not named TB and had a short week and we still came close to winning. The penalties, fumbles, dropped passes, field position, etc. can be fixed.

 

[BananaRepublican]

Pats play better at home in playoffs

You mean they have in the past, or they will in the future? If the past was a predictor for the future nothing new would ever happen.

 

[BananaRepublican]

They got torched on D but no one in the AFC has a roster nearly as talented as SF.

No they didn't. They got torched on special teams, especially the punting game. They constantly endured bad field position all night. The punter won that game for the Niners.

No Niner ran for 100, and no Niner threw for much more than 200. They really took advantage of fumbles/picks and field position.

 

[dales804]

Not more optimistic simply because they, most likely, have to go to Denver should they get the #3 seed and win Wild Card weekend.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I hate to be a downer, but last night's loss was huge. I'm not talking about morale, I'm talking about the playoffs. Yes, we have owned Denver's defense, but I would be close 100% sure we'd beat Denver at home, and I'm not optimistic about traveling to a one of the toughest stadiums in the NFL in January to face a top-5 defense led by one of the best QBs of all-time on a week's rest. The Brady-Manning rivalry is almost always won by the home team, and I can already foresee the 2 BS PI calls Manning gets, with even a 30 point lead feeling like it's coming down to the last play.

Sorry, but there isn't much rah-rah here. Glad to see the Pats had fight in them, but ultimately that L could be very costly.

Not trying to change your mind, I agree with some of your thoughts. My thought process was that we were going to lose to both Houston AND SF. This was based on the fact that we never play well or score against tough physical defenses (see the Giants and Baltimore), and even during the winning streak, the Pats Offense (vs Miami) and Defense (vs Buffalo) have been inconsistent. I am not looking at THIS Pats team as a Super Bowl Team, though they went last year. What the Pats did against Houston and SF offensively (Holding JJ Watt AND Aldon Smith to ZERO sacks), and scoring 76 points combined against those 2 defenses, has me more confident we can score against any defense out there.

My fear is what has been our Achilles Heel since 2006. DEFENSE. How many times have they played lights out, that you can feel confident this is a Super Bowl Defense ? I just don't see it yet, BUT with good drafting, and solid FA signings, this defense could be one as soon as next season. That includes this years crop being a year better. BUT, if we can't rush the QB, we are in big trouble when the playoffs come around. 1 sack a game isn't gonna do it.

 

[BananaRepublican]

Bull. Arrington is fine when he's lining up where he's supposed to be: as a nickelback. When he is thrust into the role of being an outside corner lined up against the opposing team's number one, he doesn't fit.

Tell 'em. Apparently some have not heard the NEWS.