I'd Rather Be 13-1

Snarf said:

<< I'd Rather Be 13-1 >>

Then you're a goddamn moron.

Click to expand...

Gotta say, I'm pretty wild about the succintness of this post.

This is an absurd, and loser's mentality...pardon my french. But you don't win by hoping to lose. You'd would get injuries regardless if you play or not, if your time comes it comes. Was Ben Roethlisberger playing when he plowed head first into a car?? Was Zach Thomas playing when somebody else hit his vehicle? You don't keep in sync by resting, they'll have the whole summer/spring time to rest, now they need to keep working, to make sure everything is clicking. Resting player worked out so well in recent years, looked at the SD last year, and the Colts a couple years before. Didn't work out too well did it, in my short memory, I don't think it even worked out at all for any teams, you play your games, Period.

/rant

mgteich said:

IMHO, we would have a better chance at winning the SB if we were 13-1 at this point.

Click to expand...

You are probably right, sir. Nonetheless, I'd take that chance at a shot of pro football immortality.

rsd said:

I'm so very glad that no one on this board is the head coach of an NFL team.

Click to expand...

Most aren't even knowledgeable.

There have been a LOT of stupid ideas floated lately.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, I guess, however nutty it may be. I think 14-0 is absolutely awesome and I wouldn't take a loss for anything in the NFL world right now.

I also don't think it reduces our chance of winning the SB - the injury risk may be higher but Belichick would play most of them anyway, they can't just sit out for a month. He'll let the semi injured ones have the time off they need. And being undefeated will lock the team in mentally even more than they usually are.

mgteich said:

IMHO, we would have a better chance at winning the SB if we were 13-1 at this point.

Click to expand...

Ridiculous. And that one word is 10 characters.

Yes, we are who we are. We are undefeated. We will indeed take the shot at immortality.

BTW, I never said that we should try to lese one of the next two games. I would have prefereed to have lost one our earlier NFC games.

godef said:

You are probably right, sir. Nonetheless, I'd take that chance at a shot of pro football immortality.

Click to expand...

I am curious, though.......


When all the other teams that have gone unbeaten during the regular season went on to lose in the playoffs, what round were they defeated in?

They lost their 14th game.

Deus Irae said:

I am curious, though.......


When all the other teams that have gone unbeaten during the regular season went on to lose in the playoffs, what round were they defeated in?

Click to expand...

Deus Irae said:

I am curious, though.......


When all the other teams that have gone unbeaten during the regular season went on to lose in the playoffs, what round were they defeated in?

Click to expand...

mgteich said:

They lost their 14th game.

Click to expand...

So the Dolphins have been living a lie since '72 and you're the first one to find discover this?

I disagree for a few reasons, some of them already mentioned here.

We needed 14 wins to guarantee HFA.
Momentum.

And finally, Think about it, how many teams in the NFL will ever have the potential or even get a sniff at the oppurtunity that the Patriots are presented with this season. To win the Super Bowl (with one or more losses)would be huge, 4 championships in 7 years, Dynasty !! But to win every game of the season back to back 19-0 that would be truly amazing, historic (16 game season, in this era of free agency).

Sure there is a chance that Brady, Moss or whoever gets hurt.
But if the Pats don't go for it with this team, then we might as well say that they should never go for it and just quit all this talk about winning it all. I say you take your chances and go for it. Some other team in the future will if the Pats don't and I rather see the Pats try to do it first.

mgteich said:

OK, now I get it. The team should risk injury to players to prevent posters from whining.

Click to expand...

Did you watch the game yesterday?
When did the JETS QB get hurt?
Resting players in the 4th quarter or 2nd half is not a magical formula for health.

For whatever it's worth, the Colts are taking a different approach this year--just appeared on Colts.com:

Quote:
Colts coach Tony Dungy confirmed Monday that he won't rest his starters in Week 16 against the Texans.
An undefeated Colts team in 2005 sat starters in Weeks 16 and 17 and came out flat against Pittsburgh in the playoffs. "A month is a long time," Dungy said, referring to the time before Indianapolis would play its next game with a first-round bye already in hand. The Colts' victory over Oakland Sunday assured them of the No. 2 seed in the AFC.
Source: Indianapolis Star
Related: Peyton Manning

Grizzafted said:

I think the concept of resting a team for a whole month is way worse than the risk of injury that comes with staying in a playing mindset. See: Colts, Indianapolis (2005).

Click to expand...

Exactly.

But yes -- they're playing for Super-Bowl-plus-undefeated, which is better than plain ol' Super-Bowl, and those goals could wind up conflictingly slightly.

ON THE OTHER HAND, Super-Bowl-plus-undefeated also gives some extra motivation/incentive, so that could balance out any negatives.

rsd said:

I'm so very glad that no one on this board is the head coach of an NFL team.

Click to expand...

On second thought, I wish some of the second-guessing "coaches" on this board could be the head coach of any team but the Pats!

yeah...i'm a little eccentric...definitely twisted...and there are probably more than a few women that would attest to me being perverted...

but the premise of this thread

I don't get it

Nothing wrong with knowing you're the best and going out to prove it. Yes, we could falter, but let's not settle for just a Lombardi. Aim high. I want these Pats to be placed firmly in the conversation of best football team / dynasty ever.

Whats this? A little doubt? Sneaking into the psyche of the Patsies? Do do do do, do do do do. I must be in the twilight zone.:bricks:

mgteich said:

IMHO, we would have a better chance at winning the SB if we were 13-1 at this point.

Does anyone believe that the same players would be playing in the next two weeks if we had a loss?

We have an opportunity to rest up players in preparation for the playoff run. There is NO REASON to play the starters much this week, EXCEPT that we are undefeated. This week we lost Kyle Brady. Next week we will again risk injury to our starters, and play players who need the rest.

We have an opportunity to rest this week and get reps for some of the backups thats we might need in the playoffs. If we were 13-1, we would take the opporuntity. Since we are 14-0, we most likely won't.

Click to expand...

I agree 100% and feel the same way. I also feel if we were 13-1 we would already have a loss out of our systems. The more we win consecutive games the closer we are getting to a loss.

What you said makes no sense.
Losing any game does not make you have a better chance of winning it all.