If Brady were to get injured in week 15 or 16 how would you react?

Joker said:

BB plays every game to win...first, last...check the track record.

Click to expand...

Everyone says this, but what is the track record?

I understand playing to win even if you're eliminated from the playoffs. But how many regular season games have the patriots had under Belichick where their playoff position was certain and could not be improved? Not too many, I wouldn't think. I just don't recall.

Other than those games, what is this "track record." He doesn't coach preseason games to win them, that's for sure. These to me are like glorified preseason games.

PatsFaninAZ said:

That's not what the thread is about. The thread is intended to be about how important 16-0 is to YOU and whether Brady getting hurt to pursue that goal is ok with you. Some answered that question, and it's an interesting one. Others started down the path of talking about how BB thinks all snaps are important, which may or may not be the case. Or about how it's necessary to keep the team "sharp," or whatever. All which seemed carefully designed to avoid answering that question.

Click to expand...

That is what this thread is about. "If brady were to get injured how would you feel?" Just another way of forcing opinions. BB decides if he plays, and how would we feel if he got hurt...

It seems people are trying to position themselves so that if, heaven forbid, it were to happen, they never have to confront the question or deny its legitimatcy. So they make stuff up about what Belichick was or wasn't thinking or claim to know that he thinks every snap is important to stay "sharp."

Click to expand...

No it seems some people are trying to make us believe that BB will be unnecessarily playing starters and risking injury for NO good reason. Yet they want to tell us we don't know what he's thinking.

If you'd be willing to risk injury solely for the sake of a 16-0 season, say so. Take a position. Explain why. Post number 3 in this thread did. It's a good post. It's a good question. It's a good discussion. It's a message board. It's why we're here. If you think it's a silly question, fine, pass it by.

Click to expand...

No one would choose 16-0 over health going into the playoffs, but you cannot remove all factors and make it JUST about going 16-0. You can't, period. There will never be a situation where going for 16-0 is the ONLY reason to consider playing. Therefore there is no point in such a silly question.

It seems most people are missing the point here... nobody cares that the Dolphins went 14-0, what matters is that they went 17-0 and won the Superbowl. The Pats going 16-0 will be a great accomplishment, but not even comparable to the Dolpins unless they go 19-0 and win it all. BTW, they can't do it without Brady.

Despite the front that most of you are putting up, you will be pissed if Brady tears up his knee in week 17 whether you admit it or not. Anybody who says 16-0 is more important than winning the SB is a questionable fan at best. Play him in week 16, sit him in week seventeen.

I realize that you don't want him sitting for a month, but I think sitting him in week 17 is the best thing to do... pretty much any coach would agree.

PatsFaninAZ said:

Everyone says this, but what is the track record?

I understand playing to win even if you're eliminated from the playoffs. But how many regular season games have the patriots had under Belichick where their playoff position was certain and could not be improved? Not too many, I wouldn't think. I just don't recall.

Other than those games, what is this "track record." He doesn't coach preseason games to win them, that's for sure. These to me are like glorified preseason games.

Click to expand...

The last 2 weeks of the season is really just like the weeks prior to the season? WOW


Pre-season is a whole lot different than the last game or 2 of the regular season (no matter your playoff seeding)

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=261231010

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=260101017

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=250102017

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=231227017

TIMEsteelersfan said:

It seems most people are missing the point here... nobody cares that the Dolphins went 14-0, what matters is that they went 17-0 and won the Superbowl. The Pats going 16-0 will be a great accomplishment, but not even comparable to the Dolpins unless they go 19-0 and win it all. BTW, they can't do it without Brady.

Despite the front that most of you are putting up, you will be pissed if Brady tears up his knee in week 17 whether you admit it or not. Anybody who says 16-0 is more important than winning the SB is a questionable fan at best. Play him in week 16, sit him in week seventeen.

I realize that you don't want him sitting for a month, but I think sitting him in week 17 is the best thing to do... pretty much any coach would agree.

Click to expand...

No one is claiming 16-0 is worth unnecessarily risking Brady injury. Playing the last two games doesn't have to do with 16-0, they'd play the same amount of time if they were 13-1 with 1st round locked up. IT's about staying sharp to play your best football in the playoffs. You dont want a 3 week break before a win-or-go-home game. Just like BB wasn't pulling Brady in the 3rd quarter of blowouts, he isn't pulling him for a whole game. You gotta stay in game shape and be ready for the playoffs. It's STUPID to rest them in week 17 when you have a bye imo. Maybe for a quarter but not the whole game.

Then again maybe I'm stupid and BB thinks he should rest them.

I realize that you don't want him sitting for a month, but I think sitting him in week 17 is the best thing to do... pretty much any coach would agree.

guess BB doesn't agree with you and your all knowingness

PatsFaninAZ said:

Everyone says this, but what is the track record?

I understand playing to win even if you're eliminated from the playoffs. But how many regular season games have the patriots had under Belichick where their playoff position was certain and could not be improved? Not too many, I wouldn't think. I just don't recall.

Other than those games, what is this "track record." He doesn't coach preseason games to win them, that's for sure. These to me are like glorified preseason games.

Click to expand...

2004, Pats are locked into the 2 seed, playing a bad San Francisco team at home to end the regular season, Pats play starters deep into the fourth quarter (didnt help that they played a very sloppy game that day, but still)

2006, with a minute chance to move into the 3 seed, Pats play starters deep into the fourth quarter at Tennessee (losing Rodney, of course, in the process). 3 seed hopes rest on Indy losing at home to Miami (which of course does not happen)

2003, playing for the 1 seed, Pats jump out to a 28-0 halftime lead on the Saturday game against the Bills. Remembering the 31-0 thrashing the open that season, starters play deep into the second half with the game well in hand. Defensive starters even come back in for a last goal line stand to preserve the 31-0 turnaround.

Now, when the bye was NOT in play, in 2005, came the exhibition against Miami with Doug Flutie's drop kick and Matt Cassel's two point conversion thrown 15 rows deep into the stands.

BB is obviously a history buff, and knows that it is better to let the players play to keep them in rhythm. You've earned the 1 seed, bye, and homefield throughout... take advantage of it. Get them their rest then, and try to make history...

Joker said:

I realize that you don't want him sitting for a month, but I think sitting him in week 17 is the best thing to do... pretty much any coach would agree.

guess BB doesn't agree with you and your all knowingness

Click to expand...

It's the way coaches have been doing it since the beginning of time... try watching football Joker, it will help you greatly in these discussions.

Emoney... why do you feel it's stupid to rest them in week seventeen? The only thing that comes from that is health... and please don't give me the excuse about rythme and being "in sync"... the Colts lost because they rested their players for like a month plus... we're talking about one game here, not three.

PATRIOT64 said:

How would you feel about BBs decision making if Tom Brady were to get injured in a meaningless game? (meaningless term is based solely on playoff positioning)

Click to expand...

None of the above. I would punch you in the face for jinxing him. I'm kidding with ya. I just hate when people talk about what if injuries.

It's the way coaches have been doing it since the beginning of time... try watching football Joker, it will help you greatly in these discussions.

try reading the links which DIRECTLY CONTRADICT your moronic assertions.The point, besides the on one top of your head is what will BB do. The track record shows what. You are a complete buffoon.

TIMEsteelersfan said:

It's the way coaches have been doing it since the beginning of time... try watching football Joker, it will help you greatly in these discussions.

Emoney... why do you feel it's stupid to rest them in week seventeen? The only thing that comes from that is health... and please don't give me the excuse about rythme and being "in sync"... the Colts lost because they rested their players for like a month plus... we're talking about one game here, not three.

Click to expand...

What did the Colts rest their players for the last 2 games of the regular season instead of the last one? BB has not and probably will not this time rest his players for the last game of the season with a bye following.

The FACT is too much of anything is not a good thing. The ONE extra week of rest is great, more than that it starts losing it's value. Brady has started every game since Bledsoe got injured in 2001, and now it's all of a sudden too risky to play him in that one game?


Sorry, but if he gets injured people will be judging based on hindsight. The better thing to do is play football, that's what they are paid to do. You have your best chance in the playoffs with one extra week rest, not two.

The human body adapts. Too much rest and it will adapt to that rest, gotta keep your body in game shape otherwise you are at a disadvantage. Quit saying "its ONE game". it's not, it means no game (to stay in game shape) for 3 weeks. TOO LONG TO REST.

Joker said:

It's the way coaches have been doing it since the beginning of time... try watching football Joker, it will help you greatly in these discussions.

try reading the links which DIRECTLY CONTRADICT your moronic assertions.The point, besides the on one top of your head is what will BB do. The track record shows what. You are a complete buffoon.

Click to expand...

Just because Belichick doesn't sit players doesn't mean most other coaches would do the same. Here's some breaking news Joker... Belichick is not a God... not everyone thinks the same way he does. You really need to learn about football... you've got a long, long way to go. I'm sure there's some books out there to help you along, because man, you are freakin' lost.

I would never root for it to happen, but I'll be laughing histarically if Brady breaks a finger on his throwing hand or something stupid like that and can't play in the playoffs. That would be hilarious. Almost as funny as your total incompetance and lack of football knowledge.

I would never root for it to happen, but I'll be laughing histarically if Brady breaks a finger on his throwing hand or something stupid like that and can't play in the playoffs. That would be hilarious. Almost as funny as your total incompetance and lack of football knowledge.

we already know this...you're a proven gutless Steeler troll.... and "histarical" to boot.

When I joined this site your fellow members warned me that you were a troll and not to take you seriously... I should've listened, I just wasted a few minutes of my life making you look like an *****... seems you can do that all on your own.

Goodbye Joker... your name is so appropriate. I'll send you a gift certificate for Christmas so you can by a book or two on football and learn just what it is us men are talking about in here.

PATRIOT64 said:

How would you feel about BBs decision making if Tom Brady were to get injured in a meaningless game? (meaningless term is based solely on playoff positioning)

Click to expand...

My answer would be to totally support his decision but my rationale, as would probably be BB's, would be to keep guys sharp and get game reps in. 16-0 is secondary.

I wouldn't feel any different if it happened in games 1-14 or 15-16. Which would be gloom and doom.

AFPatsFan12 said:

2004, Pats are locked into the 2 seed, playing a bad San Francisco team at home to end the regular season, Pats play starters deep into the fourth quarter (didnt help that they played a very sloppy game that day, but still)

2006, with a minute chance to move into the 3 seed, Pats play starters deep into the fourth quarter at Tennessee (losing Rodney, of course, in the process). 3 seed hopes rest on Indy losing at home to Miami (which of course does not happen)

2003, playing for the 1 seed, Pats jump out to a 28-0 halftime lead on the Saturday game against the Bills. Remembering the 31-0 thrashing the open that season, starters play deep into the second half with the game well in hand. Defensive starters even come back in for a last goal line stand to preserve the 31-0 turnaround.

Now, when the bye was NOT in play, in 2005, came the exhibition against Miami with Doug Flutie's drop kick and Matt Cassel's two point conversion thrown 15 rows deep into the stands.

BB is obviously a history buff, and knows that it is better to let the players play to keep them in rhythm. You've earned the 1 seed, bye, and homefield throughout... take advantage of it. Get them their rest then, and try to make history...

Click to expand...

Thanks. This is good. The only two games in this list I think are equivalent to the next 2 games are the San Francisco game and the Miami game.

I agree that the chances of us moving up a seed in the Tennessee game were remote, but there's a huge difference to me between remote and meaningless.

I hate these next two games. I wish the playoffs could just start next week and it could be our bye. These seem like all bad and no good can come of them. I really don't understand why my preseason game analogy is wrong. There is literally nothing to play for for either team, particularly now that the dolphins have won one, except maybe the giants will still have something in play.

I would never root for it to happen, but I'll be laughing histarically if Brady breaks a finger on his throwing hand or something stupid like that and can't play in the playoffs. That would be hilarious.

what's "histarically" funny is your impending hysterectomy. Obviously you're a woman trapped in a boy's body, with a rather incomplete understanding of simple English...nevermind your total lack of the ability to understand even the simplest concepts.

Congratulations though...this makes you the PARADIGM for all Steeler fans.

PatsFaninAZ said:

Thanks. This is good. The only two games in this list I think are equivalent to the next 2 games are the San Francisco game and the Miami game.

I agree that the chances of us moving up a seed in the Tennessee game were remote, but there's a huge difference to me between remote and meaningless.

I hate these next two games. I wish the playoffs could just start next week and it could be our bye. These seem like all bad and no good can come of them. I really don't understand why my preseason game analogy is wrong. There is literally nothing to play for for either team, particularly now that the dolphins have won one, except maybe the giants will still have something in play.

Click to expand...

The preseason analogy is flawed because it doesn't take into account game conditioning and proximity to the playoffs. Not because the games dont mean anything towards the playoffs. There's more factors than playoff seeding which come in to play these games and not the preseason games.

Now if I had a choice to not play the last game of the season and play the following week (starting the AFCCG) then heck yea that would be sweet. Don't have any additional last week injury risk and at the same time don't have too much rest. Though I would still prefer to play week 17 and have a wildcard round bye than to not play week 17 and play wildcard round

BTW the Miami game in that list was when we didn't have a bye which is why most of our guys rested. The other games where we had a bye, and in at least one case locked into a seed, starters played well into the 2nd half.

PATRIOTS64, this thread should NEVER have started!!!

Every Sunday anyone outhere on the field can get injure. "IF" is a possibility and please don't make any thread that relevant to anyone getting hurt, even with the "IF"...... don't you realized how many opposing teams and fans wanted that to happen so that Patriots lose in the playoffs????

If I'm mod, would I would delete this tread already!!