Article stating why it makes more sense to be the #4 seed

[supafly]

I can't wait for an explanation as to how Manning has gotten the Broncos defense to play better. Please, do explain...

Shock collars on the CB's...

 

[supafly]

I don't have the stats in front of me, but it seems to me more often than not Superbowls rarely feature the #1's in the big dance.

Almost 1/2 of the time actually, about 47-48%.

 

[brdmaverick]

admittedly I have not read any comments so it's possible someone has already made this point, but........

This sounds a lot like arguments from last season about how it would actually be better to be the #2 seed. After all, we all thought the #1 seed would have to play PIT AND BAL. Look how that turned out.

Forget considerations of dropping down, always play for the better seed.

Do you remember 2006 when the Pats I believe threw the final game of the season (throwing the game maybe kind of strong, but Cassel played most of the game)? Instead of going for the #3 seed which had the possibility of having to play PIT, the Pats avoided PIttsburgh and were content with #4. Well, the #3 and #4 seeds both won in the divisional and it was INDy (not NE) that hosted the championship game.

Always play for the better position.

 

[supafly]

What is there to think about?

The thought that playing IND/HOU would be more beneficial than playing PIT/DEN. That's what there is to think about.

Right, wrong, indifferent....there is certainly something to think about.

If you're basing your thoughts on the possibility that a 16-17 point underdog may pull off the upset, you have a point. Anything can happen..Manning can fall down the steps on the way to the team bus.

The point is that Belichick is a coach that often plays the odds, so it may be taken into consideration at the very least.

As I have said, I sincerely doubt that he would lose the last game to move down, but there is certainly a debate to both sides.

 

[supafly]

admittedly I have not read any comments so it's possible someone has already made this point, but........

This sounds a lot like arguments from last season about how it would actually be better to be the #2 seed. After all, we all thought the #1 seed would have to play PIT AND BAL. Look how that turned out.

Forget considerations of dropping down, always play for the better seed.

Do you remember 2006 when the Pats I believe threw the final game of the season (throwing the game maybe kind of strong, but Cassel played most of the game)? Instead of going for the #3 seed which had the possibility of having to play PIT, the Pats avoided PIttsburgh and were content with #4. Well, the #3 and #4 seeds both won in the divisional and it was INDy (not NE) that hosted the championship game.


Always play for the better position.

There was nothing subtle about it. They purposely threw the ball into the stands on the 2 pt conversion attempt. The game was clearly blown.

Most agree that the better decision would be to play for the higher seed in most cases, but after seeing him do it before there will likely be somewhat of a debate every season.

 

[MP-Logick]

admittedly I have not read any comments so it's possible someone has already made this point, but........

This sounds a lot like arguments from last season about how it would actually be better to be the #2 seed. After all, we all thought the #1 seed would have to play PIT AND BAL. Look how that turned out.

Forget considerations of dropping down, always play for the better seed.

Do you remember 2006 when the Pats I believe threw the final game of the season (throwing the game maybe kind of strong, but Cassel played most of the game)? Instead of going for the #3 seed which had the possibility of having to play PIT, the Pats avoided PIttsburgh and were content with #4. Well, the #3 and #4 seeds both won in the divisional and it was INDy (not NE) that hosted the championship game.

Always play for the better position.

The threw the final game of the 2005 season, not 2006. And it worked out - they crushed JAX in the wild card round and would have hosted the AFC Championship Game if they'd gotten past Denver - it was 2006 the 3 and 4 seeds won in the divisional round.

 

[supafly]

The threw the final game of the 2005 season, not 2006. And it worked out - they crushed JAX in the wild card round and would have hosted the AFC Championship Game if they'd gotten past Denver - it was 2006 the 3 and 4 seeds won in the divisional round.

I think that many are just feeling the common sense thinking that "you always play to win," and of course that makes sense in almost every scenario.

However, let's remember that success in the postseason is the entire reason for every single decision they have made all year long, from the scouting and drafting processes to mini's and training camp, roster management, etc, etc, etc.

It probably won't happen, but if it did it would not just be about potential seeding and improving odds by dictating our own matchups. It would also be about resting starters, managing many of the nagging injuries, and giving themselves their own version of the bye week vs Miami too.

While Belichick may not exactly "lay down" next Sunday vs MIA, he may indeed decide to rest starters and manage many injuries by playing different players in the process. To me that would likely equal much of the same thing.

 

[PYPER]

This entire thread reeks of a loser mentality unfit for Patriots Nation.

We don't hope for the "easy road". We're the 'effin New England Patriots! We welcome all challengers. We are the best team in the league. We hope for the most difficult road possible because, yes, we are THAT good.

This thread is better suited for an inferior team and fanbase that deep down knows their team is a fraud.

This thread's existence on this board is an embarrassment. I say throw it away and never think this way again.

We're not Jets or Colts fans.....We're PATRIOTS FANS! Now start acting like it.

 

[Joker]

I already paid you...now beat it!!!

 

[ATippett56]

The thought that playing IND/HOU would be more beneficial than playing PIT/DEN. That's what there is to think about.

Nothing to think about.

The New England Patriots beat Jacksonville Jaguars, Cleveland Browns beat Denver Broncos and New England Patriots are back in the #2 driver seat.

 

[supafly]

Nothing to think about.

The New England Patriots beat Jacksonville Jaguars, Cleveland Browns beat Denver Broncos and New England Patriots are back in the #2 driver seat.

Okay, Tip. Check in with me Sunday night and we'll see how that worked out

 

[supafly]

This entire thread reeks of a loser mentality unfit for Patriots Nation.

We don't hope for the "easy road". We're the 'effin New England Patriots! We welcome all challengers. We are the best team in the league. We hope for the most difficult road possible because, yes, we are THAT good.

This thread is better suited for an inferior team and fanbase that deep down knows their team is a fraud.

This thread's existence on this board is an embarrassment. I say throw it away and never think this way again.

We're not Jets or Colts fans.....We're PATRIOTS FANS! Now start acting like it.

Don't get your panties in a bunch, Rowdy Roddy.

There's nothing wrong with debating consideration of resting starters and managing nagging injuries to give themselves a bye week in the regular season.

They have done it before, and very few here, if any, were worried about what other fanbases thought of the decision. I personally couldn't care less about any kind of rah-rah "let's play the best there is" competition. I want to win the super bowl. 9 times out of 10 that takes a healthy team at the right time, coupled with some serious luck on some level. Whether that ends up being better matchups or better team management, there is usually some amount of luck involved.

It's not just about setting up better matchups, as I have stated several times. The entire goal of the season is to perform well in the postseason and we are a team that is currently banged up in many ways.

Belichick is known for thinking outside the box, not conforming to the rest of the fanbases opinion's in some ego-tistical "macho" type "we are better than every other team" mentality....

That's silly.

You may not agree with resting starters and setting up a better matchup and that is fine. I respect that to the fullest. Hell, part of me agrees with it. At the same time I want a coach who will consider every single aspect of every situation and who thinks outside of the box to put his team in the best chance of winning, and I'm pretty sure we have that.

We'll have to see if he decides to pull starters and/or rest certain players or not. There really isn't a right or a wrong answer in this case, just difference of opinions. It's nothing more than a simple back and forth debate about the pros and cons, that's all.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Nothing to think about.

The New England Patriots beat Jacksonville Jaguars, Cleveland Browns beat Denver Broncos and New England Patriots are back in the #2 driver seat.

Yep, the #3 or #4 article is not yet needed (certainly nothing wrong with having it here on patsfan though ).
Even the #1 seed is still tangibly in reach (as others have pointed out). The Texans have 2 games remaining against winning teams who are fighting for their playoff lives. Sure, the Texans are motivated to get the #1......but they are comfortably in the playoffs with at least 1 home game. We saw the lack of fight in them against the Patriots, maybe that wasn't just an aberration.

But IF it comes down to #3 or #4, wouldn't the #3 seed for the Patriots then set up a fair shoat at the AFFCG in Foxboro because of the Texans vulnerability/loss to the #4 seed? Further, we likely have to play the Broncos either way if they are so invulnerable at home, Maybe it is better to play the Broncos after they haven't played in two weeks versus them back in game routine? I say give us #3 all the way...

 

[supafly]

Yep, the #3 or #4 article is not yet needed (certainly nothing wrong with having it here on patsfan though ).
Even the #1 seed is still tangibly in reach (as others have pointed out). The Texans have 2 games remaining against winning teams who are fighting for their playoff lives. Sure, the Texans are motivated to get the #1......but they are comfortably in the playoffs with at least 1 home game. We saw the lack of fight in them against the Patriots, maybe that wasn't just an aberration.

But IF it comes down to #3 or #4, wouldn't the #3 seed for the Patriots then set up a fair shoat at the AFFCG in Foxboro because of the Texans vulnerability/loss to the #4 seed? Further, we likely have to play the Broncos either way if they are so invulnerable at home, Maybe it is better to play the Broncos after they haven't played in two weeks versus them back in game routine? I say give us #3 all the way...

Kudos for providing some clear cut reasoning.

I think this is the way that he'll go myself, even though I expect him to consider every angle as usual.

It isn't as much of the providing better matchups for me as it is giving the starters and injured players a much needed week of rest.

Either way, I think it's hard to pass up on the #3. There are some instances where it has been done, and some reasons to consider it. Every year will dictate a different set of circumstances, but I think the general consensus is to always play for the higher seed in about 90%+ of the cases.

 

[Colorado]

This entire thread reeks of a loser mentality unfit for Patriots Nation.

We don't hope for the "easy road". We're the 'effin New England Patriots! We welcome all challengers. We are the best team in the league. We hope for the most difficult road possible because, yes, we are THAT good.

This thread is better suited for an inferior team and fanbase that deep down knows their team is a fraud.

This thread's existence on this board is an embarrassment. I say throw it away and never think this way again.

We're not Jets or Colts fans.....We're PATRIOTS FANS! Now start acting like it.

Currently, you're the #3 seed, have the 5th best record in the league, and your team hasn't won a Super Bowl in almost a decade.

 

[robbomango]

Currently, you're the #3 seed, have the 5th best record in the league, and your team hasn't won a Super Bowl in almost a decade.

1st Welcome to the board

2nd Relax, It's just a fan that believes strongly in their team, as I do. SF and Denver haven't won a SB in over a decade and a half that doesn't stop people from thinking they're top contenders.

I think your team is our toughest challenge, we can dis Peyton all day long but the reality is he usually gives us a tough time win or lose.

 

[supafly]

PFW's Andy Hart explaining why the team will never get to the SB if they have to play Pittsburgh:

Hart: Steelers would have lasting impact on Patriots

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

PFW's Andy Hart explaining why the team will never get to the SB if they have to play Pittsburgh:

Hart: Steelers would have lasting impact on Patriots

Wow, I guess this writer missed the last 10 years of the Patriots-Steelers "rivalry." As for the "banged up" factor, these are professional athletes. I've heard that argument so many times only to see it derail the next week. You could just as easily argue that getting your hands dirty keeps you aggressive and in-sync, which is actually lines up better with a recent historical trend.

Every team has 300 lbs lineman to sandwich your QB and 4.5 speed hulking linebackers to destroy your skill players. The whole Steelers "tough guy" thing is really a myth in the age of football parity.

 

[supafly]

Wow, I guess this writer missed the last 10 years of the Patriots-Steelers "rivalry." As for the "banged up" factor, these are professional athletes. I've heard that argument so many times only to see it derail the next week. You could just as easily argue that getting your hands dirty keeps you aggressive and in-sync, which is actually lines up better with a recent historical trend.

Every team has 300 lbs lineman to sandwich your QB and 4.5 speed hulking linebackers to destroy your skill players. The whole Steelers "tough guy" thing is really a myth in the age of football parity.

Solid point.

I was a bit surprised to see someone like Hart stating these thoughts.

Personally I would rather play someone else, but we may not have to worry about that if they don't even get in.

I will admit that I think he has a point regarding the lack of pass rush and ability of Roethlisberger to buy additional time in the pocket, which could add more stress on our secondary.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Currently, you're the #3 seed, have the 5th best record in the league, and your team hasn't won a Super Bowl in almost a decade.

And your team last won the SB in?
And the # of times your team went to the SB in the last 12 years?
And the # of times your team went to the AFC championship in the last 12 yrs?
And the # of division titles your team won in the last decade?
And the # of times your team went to the playoffs in the last decade?
And the last time your team beat us?

And yet you join our board to make such condescending remarks?

Whew...