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

[hambone1818]

At the end of the day the truth is, its their own fault they lost that game.
I dont know what was..the monday game, overcofidence, bad calls, bad luck whatever. They cant play like they did in the fisrt half because they are so much better.
Maybe it was a good thing they lost, maybe it was a good wake up call. actually the way they battled back was a good indication of that.

I think it's a mix of everything you pointed out--and poor play in the first half certainly can't be discounted--but the highlighted is why I'm super excited about this team: they forced six fumbles but recovered just one. The Smith INT was as fluky as they get. They gave up one monster return. Talib got a ticky-tack PI call on 3rd down, while Lloyd didn't draw a flag when he was held in the EZ on third down.

All that goes in the luck category. They played sloppy, they put the ball on the ground, they had trouble stopping the big play...but ALL OF THAT can be said of SF too, they just got a few more of the bounces. I was incredibly worried about scoring points on the Niners defense, now I'm not. If they get in another track meet with SF--hopefully this year, in the SB--they'll be on the right side, unless Gronk's out again and they inexplicably have another unlucky game.

 

[Fixit]

In a way, yes. They were atrocious for the first 35 or so minutes, but they made all of the right adjustments and put SF on their heels for the rest of the game. NE scored 31 points in 1 and 1/2 quarters against the most dominant D in football that was only giving up 14 per game. They just ran out of gas at the end.

If Ridley doesn't fumble that ball, the Pats probably win by double digits. But there's a huge difference between 17-10 and 24-3. And what was up with Hernandez? He had, what, five drops by himself?

At any rate, they played just about as poorly as you can play against one of the top 2-3 teams in the league, and still almost pulled it out. All of the mistakes they made are correctable. More than that, the mistakes made were wholly atypical.

And Gronk's coming back.

This is as good as I've ever felt after a loss.

 

[BradyManny]

The only thing that matters in this league is how you perform in a given sixty minute timeframe. It's a tiny sample size, and the outcomes of games are not always indicative of which team is better.

Understanding that, last night did nothing to change my mind that this Patriots team is still the best team in the AFC and is headed for the Super Bowl.

It was a flukey game start to finish, and I'm not going to read much into it. They still played far better against the Niners defense than anyone else this season, and for as crappy the defense looked at times, you have to wonder how it fares if a couple calls and bounces go differently.

 

[hambone1818]

In a way, yes. They were atrocious for the first 35 or so minutes, but they made all of the right adjustments and put SF on their heels for the rest of the game. NE scored 31 points in 1 and 1/2 quarters against the most dominant D in football that was only giving up 14 per game. They just ran out of gas at the end.

If Ridley doesn't fumble that ball, the Pats probably win by double digits. But there's a huge difference between 17-10 and 24-3. And what was up with Hernandez? He had, what, five drops by himself?

At any rate, they played just about as poorly as you can play against one of the top 2-3 teams in the league, and still almost pulled it out. All of the mistakes they made are correctable. More than that, the mistakes made were wholly atypical.

And Gronk's coming back.

This is as good as I've ever felt after a loss.

Thank you...I started this thread and replied four or five times trying to get my point across but this about sums it up. More optimistic wasn't the right phrase but I'm excited despite the loss. This team can play with--and dominate--any team in the league when they execute. A loss is a loss, but damnit if I'm not excited about their playoff prospects after seeing them annihilate the vaunted SF defense for 25 minutes.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I can appreciate your position, and have already said that 'optimistic' might have been the wrong word--rather, I was encouraged by the way they battled back and absolutely dominated most of that second half.

However, you can say we had four turnovers but one was a bobbled ball that fell in the wrong hands. And we lost both our fumbles. San Fran had SIX fumbles and lost just one...they even had the good fortune to have a fumble lead to a TD. It's been well documented that fumbles recoveries are arbitrary, once the ball's on the ground it's a 50/50 proposition on average...for one team to recover two of two and the other to recover just one of six, I mean that's just crap luck. I'm not excusing the team, but one or two little bounces in another direction and we could be talking about a 10-3 Pats team.

"bobbled" ball. "wrong hands." fumbles that are or aren't recovered. "crap luck"..."one or two little bounces"...

come on, that's pretty much out of the "woulda coulda shoulda" playbook.

it's the nfl. stuff happens. sometimes it's good stuff. sometimes it's bad stuff. frequently it's unfair stuff. it just happens.

Jacksonville!!! That's what we should be thinking about and, if we are "praying types," saying a prayer that Cleveland plays its "game of the year" this week.

last night's game is over and done with and in the record books, a W for SF and a loss for NE and a 69 Pass Rating for our HOF-bound QB. let's leave it to Belichick and his Assistants to distill any further meaning and what can be learned as a result.

 

[ALP]

A loss is a loss BUT...

The only reason I mind this loss is due to playoff seeding implications...if we still had the #2 seed this game would be mostly only positives for me

 

[hambone1818]

"bobbled" ball. "wrong hands." fumbles that are or aren't recovered. "crap luck"..."one or two little bounces"...

come on, that's pretty much out of the "woulda coulda shoulda" playbook.

it's the nfl. stuff happens. sometimes it's good stuff. sometimes it's bad stuff. frequently it's unfair stuff. it just happens.

I completely understand that, and I'm not whining about an unfair result of the game. I'm merely pointing out that there's alot that went wrong in that game that was largely out of the players control, so looking at the bigger picture I was encouraged with the way the defense stepped up for most of the second half and the way the offense dominated down the stretch. Other people clearly disagree, that's cool...this wouldn't have gotten to 7 pages if we all agreed. But I just love the way the team played that second half and don't think anyone can beat them unless they have another SF-type game from a turnover perspective.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I completely understand that, and I'm not whining about an unfair result of the game. I'm merely pointing out that there's alot that went wrong in that game that was largely out of the players control, so looking at the bigger picture I was encouraged with the way the defense stepped up for most of the second half and the way the offense dominated down the stretch. Other people clearly disagree, that's cool...this wouldn't have gotten to 7 pages if we all agreed. But I just love the way the team played that second half and don't think anyone can beat them unless they have another SF-type game from a turnover perspective.

i don't want to go on and on about this, because i really don't think we disagree all that much. you're accentuating the positive and i'm saying, yeah, i agree, but that and five bucks will get you an overpriced latte at Starbucks because all that matters now is Jacksonville and getting some guys healthy.

yes, of course, I, too, love the way they played much of the second half, but the flip side of everything you said is that "all that doesn't matter" if the Pats hadn't played most of the first half in a daze; coming off the Houston win it was understandable, but still uncharacteristic of a Belichick-coached, Brady-led team. if Kaepernick doesn't turn over the ball and overthrow a couple of wide open receivers with four or five yards of separation, the Pats would have been down by three or four TD's at the half.

 

[supafly]

Am I "feeling more optimistic?"

Are you kidding me?

The defense went right back to being a sieve against any kind of significant talent. The special teams played like crap. Arrington was left to hang on an island by himself against Michael Crabtree late in the 4th quarter of a tied game (bring back any memories?), we lost our rookie CB Dennard, Spikes limped off the field like a lame bunny rabbit AFTER playing like crap all game due to his pre-existing injury, Ridley fumbled 2x which is certainly a concern based on his past, Hernandez stood like a deer in the headlights after he bobbled the ball on the INT rather than ya know, tackling the player, the team now has to play 3 playoff games to get to the SB instead of 2, we lose the potential of a first round bye, and now we get to go to Denver--which has been a house of horrors against Manning, no less.....

Why in the hell would I feel more optimistic? Because the offense came back vs a prevent soft shell zone defense (for the most part) once the 49'ers had the lead?

Are we suddenly the KC Chiefs where we should get points for "gutting it out?"

Last week the team was coasting along with the #2 seed and the ability to host Denver AND have a first round bye, which is much needed for the injured players. We all were celebrating the prospect of the "new" defensive production, the ability to stop both the run and the pass, etc. Now things are much different.

Is the world over? No...but I'm not sure why we should feel MORE optimistic.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

A loss is a loss BUT...

The only reason I mind this loss is due to playoff seeding implications...if we still had the #2 seed this game would be mostly only positives for me

most of me agrees with that, but I can't help but thinking that it's also kind of like saying "The only reason I mind the dentist is that he drills holes in my teeth."

 

[supafly]

if Kaepernick doesn't turn over the ball and overthrow a couple of wide open receivers with four or five yards of separation, the Pats would have been down by three or four TD's at the half.

That's pretty much what it comes down to. This team got whipped up for the most part last night in many ways.

It was nice to see them come back and put on a gutty performance, but once it mattered again SF made them putty in their hands all over again.

Lots of work to do, the return of Gronkowski will certainly help.

The odds have decreased significantly, but this could potentially point out some mistakes and slipups in time for the postseason, which is what the OP was likely referring to prior to my rant...

 

[supafly]

A loss is a loss BUT...

The only reason I mind this loss is due to playoff seeding implications...if we still had the #2 seed this game would be mostly only positives for me

I think PFS74 summed it up with the dentist analogy pretty well.

I see what you're saying of course, but the fact remains that this particular loss DID have major implications regarding the 2012 playoff run. No matter what anyone tries to convince you of, the road to the SB just became tremendously harder.

One could just as easily look at the SEA loss earlier in the year and say "well, we were crushing them throughout the first 50+ minutes of the game, so we should be able to feel pretty good about it, right?"

 

[Uncle Rico]

... if Kaepernick doesn't turn over the ball and overthrow a couple of wide open receivers with four or five yards of separation, the Pats would have been down by three or four TD's at the half.

You can go "if" all day on last night's game. The Niners put the ball on the ground 6 times by my count (including the fumble that was ruled an incomplete pass and wasn't reviewable). So, if the call is right on that play and another one or two of theSF fumbles goes the Pats way ... or if Talib doesn't stumble on his fumble recovery ... or if Brady remembers that Woodhead isn't 6-5 on that fourth and two. ...

All part of the game/is what it is/ etc.

 

[RIpats88]

theres still a chance Denver could lose one of its last 2....they seem due for an interception-manning game...Cleveland has been playing pretty tough defense lately, and kC nearly beat denver last time.

either way, it would be nice to have the bye and have homefield advantage, but if you ARE a superbowl contender it shouldnt matter whether you play on the road or at home.

the first round bye didnt help Green bay last year, and it certainly didnt help the Pats against the jets in 2010

 

[CandlestickBum]

Let me give you guys a different perspective.

1. Nobody "beats themselves". Sure, people make mistakes that lead to losses, but ultimately, they lose because the other team on the field plays better than them. I tried to tell myself that the 49ers "beat themselves" last year in the NFC championships, but the fact is, we lost because we made mistakes and the other team was good enough to capitalize on them. As Louise Pasteur said, chance favors the prepared mind. Sure, sometimes the game comes down to one bit of luck, like the blown TD call in Seattle, but over the course of the game, if you end up losing, it is usually because the other team played at least as well as you. Who wins a close game is often determined by who capitalizes on good luck, like a fumbled punt.

2. Down by 28 points in the second half is a terrible place to be, but any QB in the NFL can come back from it. Alex Smith certainly could. The only difference between Alex Smith and Tom Brady in that situation is that the probability of Alex Smith coming from 28 points behind is maybe 1 in 25 whereas the probability of Tom Brady making the comeback is maybe 1 in 5, but there is still a lot of luck involved. A lot of those long throws that Brady made during the comeback could have easily been intercepted (the 49ers are great making QBs like Brees and Brady pay for going deep) and the game would have turned out a lot different.

So, let us not pretend that luck does not tend to even out over the course of the game. Yes, the 49ers got lucky on turnovers just like the Patriots got lucky on all those desperate throws down field that found a Patriots receiver.

I think the takeaways for the game for you should be:

1) It doesn't matter how far behind the Patriots get in the first half, because with a QB as good as Brady and some luck, he is fully capable of coming back (but then, you probably already knew that ), although it is an ugly position to be in.

2) Your passing defense just is terrible and your rushing defense needs work.

Teams like the Patriots can beat any team any day in the NFL, but my general thoughts are that because they rely so heavily on their QB's ability to move the ball down-field, when they play more complete teams and those complete teams don't make a lot of mistakes, teams like the Patriots usually lose.

I think that this game exposed the weaknesses on both teams and, with a little luck, a rematch could make a very entertaining super bowl.

 

[1960Pats]

Well we won 2 in a row before.

And if the Bills can make it 4 years in a row so can we. Personally I'm shooting for 4 in a row

And then rename the Superbowl, The Patriots Bowl.

And rename the trophy the LomBrady.

Boy, we're lucky fans.

Not as great as the 60's Celts though.

 

[IndianPat]

I dont know about "more" optimistic, but

1. I get to watch one extra Patriots game (I am assuming they dont get the bye, with this loss):singing:
2. Patriots have been dismantling their opponents lately, and in the process masking the true nature of this defense. This loss exposed the Patriots defense. An eye opener for the defensive coaches to coach and game plan extra hard for the playoffs.
3. Definitely helps the offense deal with a "real" defense they are likely to face in the playoffs (like the ones they faced in their last two super bowls)

The major negative with this loss is that they will have to play Broncos in Denver. Tough place to play.

 

[ausbacker]

Let me give you guys a different perspective.

1. Nobody "beats themselves". Sure, people make mistakes that lead to losses, but ultimately, they lose because the other team on the field plays better than them. I tried to tell myself that the 49ers "beat themselves" last year in the NFC championships, but the fact is, we lost because we made mistakes and the other team was good enough to capitalize on them. As Louise Pasteur said, chance favors the prepared mind. Sure, sometimes the game comes down to one bit of luck, like the blown TD call in Seattle, but over the course of the game, if you end up losing, it is usually because the other team played at least as well as you. Who wins a close game is often determined by who capitalizes on good luck, like a fumbled punt.

2. Down by 28 points in the second half is a terrible place to be, but any QB in the NFL can come back from it. Alex Smith certainly could. The only difference between Alex Smith and Tom Brady in that situation is that the probability of Alex Smith coming from 28 points behind is maybe 1 in 25 whereas the probability of Tom Brady making the comeback is maybe 1 in 5, but there is still a lot of luck involved. A lot of those long throws that Brady made during the comeback could have easily been intercepted (the 49ers are great making QBs like Brees and Brady pay for going deep) and the game would have turned out a lot different.

So, let us not pretend that luck does not tend to even out over the course of the game. Yes, the 49ers got lucky on turnovers just like the Patriots got lucky on all those desperate throws down field that found a Patriots receiver.

I think the takeaways for the game for you should be:

1) It doesn't matter how far behind the Patriots get in the first half, because with a QB as good as Brady and some luck, he is fully capable of coming back (but then, you probably already knew that ), although it is an ugly position to be in.

2) Your passing defense just is terrible and your rushing defense needs work.

Teams like the Patriots can beat any team any day in the NFL, but my general thoughts are that because they rely so heavily on their QB's ability to move the ball down-field, when they play more complete teams and those complete teams don't make a lot of mistakes, teams like the Patriots usually lose.

I think that this game exposed the weaknesses on both teams and, with a little luck, a rematch could make a very entertaining super bowl.

You're right. Let's move away from luck and begin discussing the amount of holding the 49ers are allowed to get away with (on O/D/ST).

I said coming into the game it would be a problem and it sure did become a problem. I don't blame the 49ers for that, I blame Ed Hochuli and his replacement crew.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I'm more optimistic about Lloyd being as factor when we really need him. 28 points in 14 minutes ain't shabby either, against that D.

Everything else? Not so much.

 

[Dragda]

Outcoached? I dont think so. 1st half maybe, 2nd half no.

We never seemed to have an answer to that reverse wishbone formation. How hard can it be for professional coaches to adjust to that?