Can we now end the "Just give them time" excuses?

[PatsSteve1]

Apparently you're not deterred by the facts, even the most recent one.

* What is a fact is we're talking about this year, but I wouldn't have said the Steelers had no chance to win the Super Bowl last year. There will be teams that make the playoffs that have no realk chance to win the playoffs this year. THAT'S MY OPINION DESPITE YOUR FACTS. They were playing very well at the end of the regular season, which by the way was my original point in my 1st post of this thread. Teams that aren't playing well going into the playoffs aren't going to do well. Right now the Patriots have been very inconsistent. Up and down. They need to stay up. That's my opinion.

 

[pats1]

* What is a fact is we're talking about this year, but I wouldn't have said the Steelers had no chance to win the Super Bowl last year. There will be teams that make the playoffs that have no realk chance to win the playoffs this year. THAT'S MY OPINION DESPITE YOUR FACTS. They were playing very well at the end of the regular season, which by the way was my original point in my 1st post of this thread. Teams that aren't playing well going into the playoffs aren't going to do well. Right now the Patriots have been very inconsistent. Up and down. They need to stay up. That's my opinion.

Congratulations. You have an opinion. You say such as it's not something to be contested.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Bottom line folks, is the question of just which team will consistently decide to show up from hereon out:

The team that embarrassed that football juggernaut, the Green Bay Packers one week ago?

Or the team that itself was largely embarrassed by the Jets one week before that?

One week on and one week off doesn't cut it post-Thanksgiving. I expect that most of the guys in the locker room understand this, and that no one on the team is looking back to previous seasons to convince themselves they are right on track - especially back to 2001 given the number of players remaining from that team.

The players won't be making any more excuses - if indeed they ever did - but will the fans

 

[lutontown_fc]

* Ah, another original internet replay. I bet your getting a lot of laughs -You seem to have trouble telling opinion from fact.
Fact, yse every team that makes the playoffs "could" win the Super Bowl. Opinion, no they won't -

Really?

Every team that enters the playoffs can't win the Superbowl?

Thats because there can only be one winner - so, in fact your 'opinion' turns out to be a 'fact'.

Maybe you should spend a little time getting those two terms straight in your own head before you lecture others.

NM

 

[Rob0729]

OK - its after Thanksgiving. We've gone through the majority of the first 10 games hearing that the offense - particularly the receiving game "just needs more time"

Can we put an end to this now? How they play is how they are - ... it is what it is as one coach I know often says.

This is far from a perfect team - but there is no need to make excuses... what's going to make the difference is whether or not the team can rise above its many flaws and simply do what needs to be done to win some very tough games.

Hopefully the receivers can play beyond their skills - as some have been (I'll say for the dozenth time Reche Caldwell is proving me and a lot of other people wrong about him) and hopefully this will free up Watson for some more yardage than he's been getting because of the tight coverage.

All this being said, I still give rookies like Chad Jackson until the playoffs to truly start playing like veterans rather than rookies -but while we should still keep expecations reasonable for CJ I'm expecting he'll get a lot more passes coming his way in the next few games.

I don't get it. Yes, the offense isn't clicking like it has at it's best, but it has been far from miserable. Brady is on track for 3675 yards, 30 TDs, and 14 INTs. Those are similiar numbers to 2003 and 2004.

We are scoring 23.6 points a game. That is on par to the 2002 and 2005 season and better than 2001 and 2003. We only scored significantly more points in 2004.

The Jets game is the only game since September where we didn't score at least 20 points.

Is this receiving corp as good as past receiving corps? Definitely not. Have they come on well in recent weeks? I think so. There has been some pratfalls, but I think this receiving corp is much better than people give them credit for.

With Brady, you are never going to have a breakout receiver. I think though that several players have stepped up in their roles including Caldwell, Gaffney, and Gabriel before his fumble.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I don't get it.

There's really not much to "get".

The response to the team's inconsistent play (really the offense) to this point has generally been "just give them more time".

That I think was fine in September.

It was fine in October.

Personally, I felt like November was the time when we needed to start expressing higher expectations for consistent play, but apparently I was in a minority.

I'm now asking whether post-Thanksgiving marks an end to the "just give them more time" excuses.

Judging by the responses here the answer is a big loud "No".

If we continue to have good games and bad games into December that's not a concern to most. That's fine if that's how people feel - but come January, one off game and you're done.

So for me, the team needs to show they can consistently play well from hereon out - I have high expectations of my team, I know, and am clearly in the minority, but that's just how I am.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Really?

Every team that enters the playoffs can't win the Superbowl?

Thats because there can only be one winner - so, in fact your 'opinion' turns out to be a 'fact'.

* I can't believe you even bothered to reply with that -

 

[PatsSteve1]

There's really not much to "get".

The response to the team's inconsistent play (really the offense) to this point has generally been "just give them more time".

That I think was fine in September.

It was fine in October.

Personally, I felt like November was the time when we needed to start expressing higher expectations for consistent play, but apparently I was in a minority.

* I read this and heard the song in my head "Just the Two of Us" - There's probably more, but don't wanna get involved. I agree with you though. IMO, just winning the AFCE and making the playoffs and not taking into account what preceeded that doesn't cut it. If the Patriots lose to the Bears and say another game, but still win the AFCE, I don't think they'll go very far. Apparently all don't feel that way. I don't think they can just make the playoffs and then turn on the better play switch. IMO, the season, right from training camp is a long march to where the team is playing it's best at the end of the year so they go into the playoffs with momentum and confidence.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I read this and heard the song in my head "Just the Two of Us" - There's probably more, but don't wanna get involved. I agree with you though. IMO, just winning the AFCE and making the playoffs and not taking into account what preceeded that doesn't cut it. If the Patriots lose to the Bears and say another game, but still win the AFCE, I don't think they'll go very far. Apparently all don't feel that way. I don't think they can just make the playoffs and then turn on the better play switch. IMO, the season, right from training camp is a long march to where the team is playing it's best at the end of the year so they go into the playoffs with momentum and confidence.

Although we've had plenty of people tout stats that would have one believe otherwise, it can't be denied that since winning the 2004 Super Bowl the Patriots have lost more than 75% of the games they've played against teams with winning records.

And this season, they've lost 100% of their games against teams with winning records.

That's a bitter pill to swallow - and its quite simply not good enough for me, and I'll be that's not good enough for the guys in the locker room.

Some fans might want to cheer themselves up with statistics that tout yards per pass caught (ignoring the critical passes that fall to the ground) or others that suggest we're an elite team.

But right now we're not - and the only statistic that really counts for me is how we play against the elite playoff-bound competition.

Right now we're not doing so hot in that category. A win today would be a good first step to turning that stat around.

That's what I expect. And if they don't win, there should really be no excuses... blaming the refs, blaming the turf, blaming the fact that the guys on the team have only been playing together for 10 games or so....

The Patriots of 2001, 2003 & 2004 never made excuses, and neither did their fans - that's what other loser teams did.

I'll not apologize for having high expectations and being unwilling to accept excuses anymore.

 

[RayClay]

OK I apologize.

I should have done more to prevent the Bengals and Vikings from losing games after we beat them.

When we beat the Bears I will dedicate myself to preventing them from going into a tailspin in the final six games thereby eliminating themselves as an "elite" team and diluting the importance of our victory.

One question. If the Packers rip off six in a row, do we get credit for beating an elite team 35-0?

Just asking.

 

[pats1]

Although we've had plenty of people tout stats that would have one believe otherwise, it can't be denied that since winning the 2004 Super Bowl the Patriots have lost more than 75% of the games they've played against teams with winning records.

And this season, they've lost 100% of their games against teams with winning records.

And the only one that mattered was against Denver last January.

High expectations about what? Your posts sound like the Pats just lost to the Colts in the AFC Championship.

Complain when the Patriots lose in the playoffs. Until then, I can't see your case.

That's a bitter pill to swallow - and its quite simply not good enough for me, and I'll be that's not good enough for the guys in the locker room.

Are you kidding me? Do you think the Pats are sitting in the locker room, or BB is speaking, and all that's on their minds is how they didn't beat Denver or Indy? They don't dwell over losses like someone obviously does. They move on and focus on being good enough to make the playoffs. Ask any player.

Last time I checked, the standings that decide which teams make the playoffs, and where they're seeded aren't listed like this:

New England Patriots:

Wins: 7
Losses: 1
Losses against 'quality teams': 2

So if a team loses more games, but less against 'quality teams,' that makes them less of an 'elite team?'

Not in the NFL I watch.

Some fans might want to cheer themselves up with statistics that tout yards per pass caught (ignoring the critical passes that fall to the ground) or others that suggest we're an elite team.

But right now we're not - and the only statistic that really counts for me is how we play against the elite playoff-bound competition.

It's November 26th, for chrissakes.

Does it really matter if fans - feet, usually miles away from the field - consider 'their' team to be 'elite' or not?

Again, the standings ARE NOT like how you seem to envision them:

New England Patriots:

Wins: 7
Wins against 'quality teams': 0
Losses: 1
Losses against 'quality teams': 3

No, No, NO!

If you wanted the Patriots to win against playoff caliber teams to make YOU feel good about the team's chances in the playoffs great. Anything to make you happy. But come January, NOBODY with any consequence to the action on the field gives a **** about what happened in week 3 or week 9 or the entire REGULAR season for that matter.

Right now we're not doing so hot in that category. A win today would be a good first step to turning that stat around.

Wait - didn't you just criticize other fans for using stats to "cheer themselves up?"

That's PRECISELY what you just did.

"Wins against quality teams" is a STATISTIC that has obviously a bearing on how you perceive this team, but that's it!

That's what I expect. And if they don't win, there should really be no excuses... blaming the refs, blaming the turf, blaming the fact that the guys on the team have only been playing together for 10 games or so....

The Patriots of 2001, 2003 & 2004 never made excuses, and neither did their fans - that's what other loser teams did.

I'll not apologize for having high expectations and being unwilling to accept excuses anymore.

You see, you really DON'T have high expectations. Your expectations are in fact quite low -- winning against quality opponents in the regular season simply to make yourself feel better about the team's chances in the playoffs against the same opponents. Others' HIGH expectations are for perfection in the playoffs, and nothing less (that is the nature of the playoffs).

You may not like it against your LOW expectations, but excuses are perfectly acceptable in the regular season provided your team achieves it's goal of making the playoffs. Higher seeding is a bonus, but situations like referees, field conditions, and injuries may affect that seeding. But it's not the end of the world.

The regular season is a time for adjustments. It's practice, for a team DOES NOT make the SAME MISTAKES as they did against the SAME OPPONENTS in the REGULAR SEASON.

It's NOT winning against POOR teams that tweaks me, because those are the games that get teams into the playoffs (read: fluff their records).

But the 2003 and 2004 lost against POOR teams too. Buffalo, 31-0? Miami, 29-28? The 17-14 loss to the Jets this year falls into the same category, so don't act like these Patriots haven't done enough to make themselves good as the 2003 and 2004 teams did, at least in that category.

I won't accept excuses in January, either, because that's when a team, by learning through its MISTAKES of the regular season, must come out on top.

 

[Rob0729]

There's really not much to "get".

The response to the team's inconsistent play (really the offense) to this point has generally been "just give them more time".

That I think was fine in September.

It was fine in October.

Personally, I felt like November was the time when we needed to start expressing higher expectations for consistent play, but apparently I was in a minority.

I'm now asking whether post-Thanksgiving marks an end to the "just give them more time" excuses.

Judging by the responses here the answer is a big loud "No".

If we continue to have good games and bad games into December that's not a concern to most. That's fine if that's how people feel - but come January, one off game and you're done.

So for me, the team needs to show they can consistently play well from hereon out - I have high expectations of my team, I know, and am clearly in the minority, but that's just how I am.

To blame the inconsistencies on the offense on the WRs is unfair. They have their fair share of the blame, but our offense wasn't consistent last year with Branch and givens. Against the Jets, I blame the o-line more than the receivers. We got beat by our own game because we were confused at the line by LBs moving on and off the line like we do to other teams. Also, Brady's throws were off target more than several times to wide open WRs. Against the Colts, it wasn't the WRs fault that Brady threw into triple coverage or balls bounced off Faulks' or Watson's hands.

I don't see the WRs being the problem with this team as other people seem to. When we are inconsistent, I see breakdowns with the o-line, either ineffective running or us quitting on the run, and I see Brady missing receivers. The only thing our receivers have a lot of control on is the last one and Brady has as much or more control.

I have actually been more disapointed with our o-line than our WRs this year. They were supposed to be a position of strength and they have been losing the battle in the trenches more often than I expected especially in our three losses.

 

[JoeSixPat]

To blame the inconsistencies on the offense on the WRs is unfair. They have their fair share of the blame, but our offense wasn't consistent last year with Branch and givens. Against the Jets, I blame the o-line more than the receivers. We got beat by our own game because we were confused at the line by LBs moving on and off the line like we do to other teams. Also, Brady's throws were off target more than several times to wide open WRs. Against the Colts, it wasn't the WRs fault that Brady threw into triple coverage or balls bounced off Faulks' or Watson's hands.

I don't see the WRs being the problem with this team as other people seem to. When we are inconsistent, I see breakdowns with the o-line, either ineffective running or us quitting on the run, and I see Brady missing receivers. The only thing our receivers have a lot of control on is the last one and Brady has as much or more control.

I have actually been more disapointed with our o-line than our WRs this year. They were supposed to be a position of strength and they have been losing the battle in the trenches more often than I expected especially in our three losses.

Well, pick your poison I guess, but I'd agree that one aspect of the offense is never solely at fault.

The "give them time" was the loudest excuse ... I don't care what excuse people prefer either... just that there's no more room for any of them

"You are what your record says you are" and when it comes to teams with winning records, the Patriots don't have a very good record.

I'm hoping the team puts this chip on their shoulder and plays as if they have something to prove - because they do - if they want a 4th Lombardi that is.

 

[Rob0729]

Although we've had plenty of people tout stats that would have one believe otherwise, it can't be denied that since winning the 2004 Super Bowl the Patriots have lost more than 75% of the games they've played against teams with winning records.

And this season, they've lost 100% of their games against teams with winning records.

That's a bitter pill to swallow - and its quite simply not good enough for me, and I'll be that's not good enough for the guys in the locker room.

Some fans might want to cheer themselves up with statistics that tout yards per pass caught (ignoring the critical passes that fall to the ground) or others that suggest we're an elite team.

But right now we're not - and the only statistic that really counts for me is how we play against the elite playoff-bound competition.

Right now we're not doing so hot in that category. A win today would be a good first step to turning that stat around.

That's what I expect. And if they don't win, there should really be no excuses... blaming the refs, blaming the turf, blaming the fact that the guys on the team have only been playing together for 10 games or so....

The Patriots of 2001, 2003 & 2004 never made excuses, and neither did their fans - that's what other loser teams did.

I'll not apologize for having high expectations and being unwilling to accept excuses anymore.

I have no problem with you saying to stop making excuses for inconsistent or poor play, but I do have a problem with laying it all on the WRs dorrstep. They deserve their fair share of the blame, but we lost to the Jets primarily in the trenches on both sides of the ball. I felt there were plenty of places where we could point the blame for our loss to the Colts. We had no answer for Harrison and Wayne in that game. Even if Brady and the WRs were on target all night, I don't know if we would have been able to stop the Colts' offense. I think the only loss where you can give the lionshare of the blame to the WRs is the Broncos.

I agree we shouldn't make lame excuses for our losses, but I don't look at our three losses and think if we had Branch and Givens that we would be undefeated now. I think the only game they make a difference in is our loss to the Broncos.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, pick your poison I guess, but I'd agree that one aspect of the offense is never solely at fault.

The "give them time" was the loudest excuse ... I don't care what excuse people prefer either... just that there's no more room for any of them

"You are what your record says you are" and when it comes to teams with winning records, the Patriots don't have a very good record.

I'm hoping the team puts this chip on their shoulder and plays as if they have something to prove - because they do - if they want a 4th Lombardi that is.

I don't think the receivers need time other than Jackson. I think might be playing as good as Givens has for us. Gabriel when on the field is productive. Gaffney is good for a handful of decent size plays. No this receiving corp isn't the Branch, Givens, Patten, Brown receiving corp of 2003 and 2004, but I don't think it is the worst one in the league by a long shot.

I think if the rest of the offense is clicking, this receiving corp is good enough to go up against any defense. I think when the o-line is shakey or Brady is off, they aren't good enough to step up and make plays where there isn't any like some receivers can. Although Caldwell's TD vs. the Jets was one such play.