Does the bitter end to 2007 have to be redeemed?

JMarr said:

Great answer--and it took 8 pages for someone to nail it.

Anyone who didn't see that after Spygate 2007 became nothing more than a bloodthirsty revenge tour by the Pats simply wasn't paying attention.

Does anyone really think that Belichick just robotically focuses on the next opponent or challenge, and doesn't often reflect on the overall picture, like for instance what his legacy will be?

Click to expand...

I don't think he let's his view of the current punditry's "legacy" perspective drive his strategy, he may not take his foot off the pedal, but he won't drive out of his way to run them over either.

Box_O_Rocks said:

I should have said Gracie Allen, I don't know if she used it as a stage name after marrying George Burns or if she kept her maiden name, but go rent some George Burns and Gracie Allen movies you young whippersnapper!

Click to expand...

he needs a lot more than a couple of movies

Deus Irae said:

Click to expand...

OK...that was brilliant...congrats...

jmt57 said:

Back to the original question for a moment before returning to George and Gracie:



I wouldn't use the word "redeem" myself, but let's skip that for now. As has been debated in other threads, the Pats should go down as the team of the decade, even if the Steelers do win the Super Bowl this year. However, with both teams having won the same number of championships this decade if that does occur, it obviously makes it far less clear cut. A fourth Super Bowl victory in the decade not only seals the deal and eliminates any doubt, but it would also place the Pats of the 2000's among the best "team of the decade" in NFL history.

Although it seems to hold true in the court of public opinion, I don't understand why a Super Bowl loss tarnishes a team's reputation. Why is it that in many people's minds that ending the season earlier in the playoffs - or not making the playoffs at all - is better than losing in the Super Bowl? This is not something new; people used to get down on the Vikings, the Broncos and the Bills for their Super Bowl losses. Now some people act like the Pats loss makes three wins less impressive than two wins, or even teams with one win this decade. Three wins > two wins; four appearnces > two appearances.

An extra benefit that would be provided is that the "haven't won anything since 2004" and "can't win without spying" crowd would be quieted down - at least until they came up with another excuse. The flip side to that unfortunately is that anything less will be used as "proof" by the haters that the Pats of this decade weren't all that great, they were chokers, and couldn't win without cheating. Whether it be this year or somewhere down the road, another BB/Brady Super Bowl win is going to be needed to get those folks to STFU.

Click to expand...

Good analysis. My only problem is, why should we care what those people think? Anyone who understands this game understands the magnitude of the pats accomplishments this decade. Why do we even care what the idiots think?

PatsFanSince74 said:

Good analysis. My only problem is, why should we care what those people think? Anyone who understands this game understands the magnitude of the pats accomplishments this decade. Why do we even care what the idiots think?

Click to expand...

We shouldn't care, especially when you consider that even if the Pats win it all again this coming season, all of those idiots will still use the same tired excuses or just create new ones.

The Pats shouldn't have gone 18-0, not with their pass defense. That guys like Feeley and Boller were able to move the ball on them, spoke volumes. In the playoffs, Garrard was very efficient and the Pats has trouble putting away a crippled SD team in the AFCCG.

What hurt the most?
When the Pats had the Giants buried on their 17 with 2:17, needing a TD to win, and Eli moved through the Pats D like butter. No excuses. In 2008, the Pats Pass D hit rock bottom.

With the offseason improvements, I'm having a hard time guarding my optimism. Barring injuries. I don't see anyone beating the Pats this season. If the D fails yet again, Dean Pees must go. I hold him responsible for SB 42, when the Pats looked to be in the wrong defense allowing Hobbs to be 1-on-1 with Plax in the corner endzone.

As for the OP, if the Pats fail to win the SB in '09 they will be reminiscent of Bird Era Cs. It was a joy to watch those Celtic teams in the 1980s but by the time Bird went down with that ankle injury, I always felt they could have done more.

At least the Cs had the Bias excuse, but the Pats were not only close in '07, but '06 as well. Each time the D failed. Beating the Bears would have been a formality.

As for going 19-0? Hey, this is a team that won 18-straight and 21-straight. Not trying to get anyone's hopes up, but to say it won't happen wouldn't jibe with the recent historical record.

One last thing, does any Pats fan really like seeing that sickening 16-0 banner? Every time the cameras show it, there's an acid ball forming in the pit of my stomach.

Nice analysis.

Brady-To-Branch said:

The Pats shouldn't have gone 18-0, not with their pass defense. That guys like Feeley and Boller were able to move the ball on them, spoke volumes. In the playoffs, Garrard was very efficient and the Pats has trouble putting away a crippled SD team in the AFCCG.

Click to expand...

This is the kind of s*** I don't want to see this season. I don't want to see average QB's looking like pro bowlers. If you expect to win a championship, you have to make these QB's look like the journeyman they are.

What hurt the most?
When the Pats had the Giants buried on their 17 with 2:17, needing a TD to win, and Eli moved through the Pats D like butter. No excuses. In 2008, the Pats Pass D hit rock bottom.

Click to expand...

Word! I've said the the same thing on hear which has angered a lot of Pats fans. Expect to get attacked.

With the offseason improvements, I'm having a hard time guarding my optimism. Barring injuries. I don't see anyone beating the Pats this season. If the D fails yet again, Dean Pees must go. I hold him responsible for SB 42, when the Pats looked to be in the wrong defense allowing Hobbs to be 1-on-1 with Plax in the corner endzone.

Click to expand...

I heard that there was supposed to be safety help on that play. However, as much as they're lacking on defense (pass rush), they're still the best team in the league. With the improvements on defense (secondary), Pees has to go if this defense fails them again.

As for the OP, if the Pats fail to win the SB in '09 they will be reminiscent of Bird Era Cs. It was a joy to watch those Celtic teams in the 1980s but by the time Bird went down with that ankle injury, I always felt they could have done more.At least the Cs had the Bias excuse, but the Pats were not only close in '07, but '06 as well. Each time the D failed. Beating the Bears would have been a formality.

Click to expand...

Good example, I feel the same way. I'm going to piss a lot of people off again, but I feel the Pats management has been in a slump since '04. Sure they have acquired some good players, but not enough to fill holes which has cost them games against the Broncos, Colts and Giants in the post season.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP? said:

Nice analysis.


This is the kind of s*** I don't want to see this season. I don't want to see average QB's looking like pro bowlers. If you expect to win a championship, you have to make these QB's look like the journeyman they are.


Word! I've said the the same thing on hear which has angered a lot of Pats fans. Expect to get attacked.


I heard that there was supposed to be safety help on that play. However, as much as they're lacking on defense (pass rush), they're still the best team in the league. With the improvements on defense (secondary), Pees has to go if this defense fails them again.


Good example, I feel the same way. I'm going to piss a lot of people off again, but I feel the Pats management has been in a slump since '04. Sure they have acquired some good players, but not enough to fill holes which has cost them games against the Broncos, Colts and Giants in the post season.

Click to expand...

Both of you hit the nail on the head. FO has not done a great job of replenishing talent and filling holes as they did in 01, 02, 03, 04.

Is Pees a good DC? Not sure. But what is consistient is that late in big games, 01 SB, 03 SB, 04 SB, 06 AFCCC, 07 div and 07 SB the pass D has given up large chunks of real estate. Is it talent? Is it the scheme to fit the talent? Is it the talent to fit the scheme? Is it overall late-game/situation philosophy of BB?

PatsDparty said:

There's a difference between cheering the water and expecting Niagra Falls to come rushing through the desert

It just gets nauseating to constantly read fans worrying about team of the decade "honors" and hoping for an undefeated season.

Click to expand...

I hear you, but from me, I love to see championships, for unless we find our version of Steve Young, these are the good ole days of Patriot football, we may never see this level of greatness in our lifetime again, so I just try to enjoy while i can.

Yes it can be nauseating that some fans constantly talking about wanting it all. For me it has more to do history. I love to talk sports and enjoy looking back at fond memories. down the road, 10-15 years,and later, we will here and there get into conversation about great teams of the past, 60s Packers and 70s steelers, etc., and I for one would love to be able to add to the conversation the 00 Pats, and also would not having enough ammo to claim that the 00's pats are the best of the best . . . :singing:

PatsFanSince74 said:

well, i guess i qualify as an "old fan." I saw my first pats game in 1974, my first NFL game in 1960. More than anything else, seeing them through the dark days makes me grateful for what they've accomplished--beyond my wildest dreams. no, i'm not "greedy" for more. don't get me wrong; i'd love to see Brady and Belichick bring another Lombardi to Foxboro, but they have already more than delivered as far as I'm concerned.

And, the most important point for me is that I believe that the Krafts are building a franchise that will still be delivering excellence long after BB and TB have retired and we're visiting their busts in Canton. Being greedy in the short term almost implies that it's somehow gonna be "over" when those two guys are gone.

Click to expand...

I hope your right, I do feel that way, but if not, then we can look back at fond memories of the BB/TB Pats . . .

PatsFanSince74 said:

Good analysis. My only problem is, why should we care what those people think? Anyone who understands this game understands the magnitude of the pats accomplishments this decade. Why do we even care what the idiots think?

Click to expand...

Isn't that the million dollar question? If people on this board (and every other sports board) didn't care, we wouldn't have half of these pointless threads.

16-0 was a great accomplishment...I mean, we put up a banner for it

If the pats are fortunate enough to win the super bowl this year (I think some people seem to think it's a given every year), I don't want to come back to threads that say, "It's not as good as 19-0 blah blah blah." We sound like a bunch of spoiled rotten fans.

I'm going to defend the FO.

From the drafts of 2004-06 there was a dearth of quaility DBs.

2004: After Bob Sanders was drafted by Indy, the Pats settled for Guss Scott and Dexter Reid. Both were NFL players: Not For Long

2005: I've read and heard that the Pats wanted Marlon Jackson in round one. The Colts grabbed him. At the end of round 2, the Pats wanted Bryant McFadden but the Steelers grabbed him and the Pats quickly traded out of the round and settled for Hobbs late in round 3. James Sanders was a nice find in the 5th round, but he's more of a solid contributor than a playmaker.

2006: The Pats obviously didn't see a DB worthy of taking in the first round.

The fortunes have changed from 2007-2009:

2007: After a terrible rookie season, Brandon Meriweather has made a 180 turn in 2008. I was amazed at his ability to stick with receivers on deep routes. He was a bright spot in 2008.

2008: Weatley was a 2nd round steal. He was about to lock up the slot/nickel spot when he reinjured his wrist breaking up a pass against Indy. IMO, he'll be fun to watch in 2009. Jonathan Wilhite was another steal in the 4th round. He took over the starting job from the ineffective Deltha O'Neal.

2009: Chung should be better than Sanders based on his skills and NCAA experience. The Pats got very lucky when Darius Butler fell to them.

That's not to mention the FA additions of Springs (great YPA in '08) and Bodden (shutdown YPA in 2007).

Overall, this is the deepest, most talented secondary in the BB Era. That will improve the pass rush which means the Pats are poised for another SB run.

As for Hobbs, blaming the safety has been the mantra of his defenders. Fact was, he just couldn't stick with receivers, deep or across the middle. Moreover, he gave up too much cushion and was late to get to the receiver in the underneath on short passes.

To his credit, Hobbs has acted with class since getting traded. When he's not playing the Pats, I wish him well. Maybe the change in scenery will help him.

I think so. And it will be this season!

robertweathers said:

Both of you hit the nail on the head. FO has not done a great job of replenishing talent and filling holes as they did in 01, 02, 03, 04.

Is Pees a good DC? Not sure. But what is consistient is that late in big games, 01 SB, 03 SB, 04 SB, 06 AFCCC, 07 div and 07 SB the pass D has given up large chunks of real estate. Is it talent? Is it the scheme to fit the talent? Is it the talent to fit the scheme? Is it overall late-game/situation philosophy of BB?

Click to expand...

the one overlooked thing about our D is that Romeo Crennel is no longer running it. the team looked better defensively when he was around. Is it pees or the players? not sure.

I think as long as they win the Super Bowl redemption will be found. Expecting 19-0 is just too much. There were so many breaks along the way to even reach 16-0; I couldn’t imagine everything going their way like in 2007 in order to replicate that feat.

Just take a look at the winning drive against Baltimore. Rex Ryan calls time out just before a play starts where the Pats are stopped. A false start on a play where they get stuffed backs them up even more, but gives them another chance. Brady then scrambles for the first and they get more on a flag. Fourth down comes up again, but they’re saved by defensive holding. You guys know how the rest goes.

I couldn’t imagine another sequence as crazy as this to happen to keep something like an unbeaten season alive.

as long as TFB wins another ill be happy

i still cant listen to tom petty

No, just avoided. Run the ball, play defense and also pass. One dimensional teams get pwned. We should know, our defense did it for years.

Personally if I had a choice of winning it would be nailing down the Colts in the Championship game, and get that ring - one more for us, one less for Manning.

Next would be '76, which we should have won.

But since those two are gone, I'll take this year - 17-2 is good enough for me.

It can't be redeemed it was 2 yrs ago, there is no redemption for that game. Yet, if they win another one it will sure make that game more palatable.

BradyManny2344 said:

Just about anytime I make a post even referencing SB42 loosely, I'm reminded by how hauntingly close this team was to making extremely epic sports history, and how - a large part thanks to one lucky play - that was ripped away.

While Brady & Belichick are together, we as Patriot fans are in a unique situation where we have a reasonable expectation of a championship caliber team every year. Some will call it greed - I disagree. As long as these two are together, a year that doesn't end in a Patriots championship is going to be a disappointment.

Considering the bitter way in which 2007 ended, and considering how 2006 also had a strange, twisted and depressing ending [in that case, one in which fate, the refs, and the flu deprived of us a championship] does this team need to win another ring to "redeem" itself and help minimize the sting of those two losses and maximize the impact of their decade long greatness?

Click to expand...

As a fan, while I root for it, and am also disappointed by non-championship seasons, I know it is not automatic.