How dare pundits say the Chargers lost, when the Pats won

[Patters]

They fault Marty for going for it on fourth and eleven, but it wasn't a terrible call. After all, in most situations, the worst that would have happened is the Pats would have gotten the ball at the 30 yard line. But the Pats risked all to sack Rivers and picked up an extra few yards of field position. That was smart playing by the Pats.

They said that if the Chargers used Tomlinson more they would have won. The Pats couldn't stop Tomlinson. But look at his runs: 11, 3, 3, 0, 15, 6, 14, 0, 5, 4, 3, 11, 2, 2, 6, 0, 2, 9, 13, 3, 1, 5 (not inluding TD runs of 2 and 3). Sure, he had some good runs, but when faced with 3rd and 7, 10, 11, 4, 7, 8, 17, 5, and 6 (with just a minute left), it's certainly reasonable not to use Tomlinson in most of those cases. The Pats were ready for him.

They said that the Chargers played carelessly, making bad decisions, but was Colvin's interception anything other than a great heads up play?

They said that McCree blew the game by intercepting the Pats on 4th down, but what CB would not have intercepted? There were 6-1/2 minutes left! If McCree had held onto the ball, the Pats would have certainly gotten maybe even two more tries. And was it bad playing by McCree or great playing by Brown that forced the fumble?

Look at the Chargers field position: Pats 26, 50, 35, 47, 48, 41, 23, 34, 32, 40, 17, 32, 29, 25. The Chargers had multiple opportunities to make something happen, but they failed time and again. It wasn't the Chargers fault. The Patriots stopped them whether they ran or passed. (And Brady didn't have a bad game, the Chargers pressured him. When QBs play against good Ds, their ratings drop. Duh!)

Throughout the week, they said the Chargers weakness was their secondary, so what do the Pats do? Go after their secondary. That's not a case of the Chargers having a bad day or bad play calling; it's a case of the Pats finding a way to exploit the Chargers weakness.

They said the Chargers handled the last minute of the game very badly, but is that a case of them having a bad day or having a young QB who wasn't as good as time management as Brady? Would the Chargers have moved faster on other days? I doubt it.

The Pats beat the Chargers because the Pats were the superior team. They played smarter football because they are smarter. They put tremendous emphasis into protecting Brady and finding a way to beat the Chargers through the air. The Pats succeeded. The Chargers didn't have a bad day. It wasn't Marty's fault. Simply put, the better team won, and the pundits are simply too embarrassed by their six years of underestimating the Pats to admit their mistake.

 

[SVN]

i respect all your opinions but if chargers had run the ball more in the 2nd half or even their last drive when the score was tied , they would pulled away...no disrespect to our team but the chargers helped us out IMO by not running LT inthe 2nd half enough.He didnt have consecutive running plays in the 2nd half.

 

[The Predator]

i respect all your opinions but if chargers had run the ball more in the 2nd half or even their last drive when the score was tied , they would pulled away...no disrespect to our team but the chargers helped us out IMO by not running LT inthe 2nd half enough.He didnt have consecutive running plays in the 2nd half.

I have to agree. There needs to be a balanced non-homer outlook. Do we deserve credit for making some big plays? Well sure. Did they blow the door open so we could walk through? Ya, big time.

 

[Patters]

i respect all your opinions but if chargers had run the ball more in the 2nd half or even their last drive when the score was tied , they would pulled away...no disrespect to our team but the chargers helped us out IMO by not running LT inthe 2nd half enough.He didnt have consecutive running plays in the 2nd half.

Tomlinson's second down runs were: 6 yards (when they needed 17, so I assume we were playing the pass), 4 yards (when they needed 5), 2 yards (when they needed 19). Sure, using Tomlinson more might have worked, but I think the Pats were getting the hang of handling him as the game progressed. Let's not forget that the Pats D is very strong against the run and weaker against the pass, so I think for the Chargers it was a matter of picking their poison.

 

[onegameatatime]

As I posted in another thread, from the time the Pats had 1st and 10 on the SD32, Pats needed at least FG+TD or TD+2pt+FG to take the lead. SD had many ways and opportunities to stop the Pats, but the Pats got it done.

Of all the mistakes -- going on 4-11, head-butt, etc -- none happened after the 1st and 10 on the SD 32. It was about execution and getting it done when it mattered most.

 

[The Predator]

As I posted in another thread, from the time the Pats had 1st and 10 on the SD32, Pats needed at least FG+TD or TD+2pt+FG to take the lead. SD had many ways and opportunities to stop the Pats, but the Pats got it done.

Of all the mistakes -- going on 4-11, head-butt, etc -- none happened after the 1st and 10 on the SD 32. It was about execution and getting it done when it mattered most.

Oh ok, so if Troy had not stripped a ball that should have been batted down we still would have found a way to win? No that is not true at all. Again, Pats deserve credit, but SD make the mistakes so we could stay in the game.

 

[Deus Irae]

Oh ok, so if Troy had not stripped a ball that should have been batted down we still would have found a way to win? No that is not true at all. Again, Pats deserve credit, but SD make the mistakes so we could stay in the game.

You can say that New England would have definitely lost without Brown's play, and you can say that San Diego would definitely have won if LDT had run the ball more in the second half?


Listen, Kreskin needs your help, so give him a call.

 

[Joker]

Kreskin is taking an extended dirt nap

 

[Patters]

Oh ok, so if Troy had not stripped a ball that should have been batted down we still would have found a way to win? No that is not true at all. Again, Pats deserve credit, but SD make the mistakes so we could stay in the game.

The way our O was playing at the end and the way our D was playing, I think it's very likely that we would have held the Chargers, gotten the ball back, and moved it down the field to tie up the game. After that, it probably would have gone into overtime, at which point it's anybody's guess.

 

[The Predator]

You can say that New England would have definitely lost without Brown's play, and you can say that San Diego would definitely have won if LDT had run the ball more in the second half?


Listen, Kreskin needs your help, so give him a call.

Why can't you just be reasonable? Everything does not need to be so extreme. It has nothing to do with psychic ability, but common sense.

I did not say we would have lost if STD ran the ball more. You decided to put those words into my mouth. However, it is not a bad theory. It is a theory though. Some would theorize differently. We have no idea what would have happened and we do not need to know.

Fact says we needed two scores to win on 4th and 10 with 6 minutes left. Common sense says (and majority of the media) that Troy Brown saved our season with that play. No reason to be a homer and go off any further.

Why is that so difficult?

The facts are that NE capitolized on big SD mistakes. If you cannot admit that you are a blindsided homer who isnt worth talking to.

Bottom line is we won. Go argue with that.

 

[lander]

The Pats beat the Chargers because the Pats were the superior team. They played smarter football because they are smarter. They put tremendous emphasis into protecting Brady and finding a way to beat the Chargers through the air. The Pats succeeded. The Chargers didn't have a bad day. It wasn't Marty's fault. Simply put, the better team won, and the pundits are simply too embarrassed by their six years of underestimating the Pats to admit their mistake.

I can handle the trash talking, the LT & Chargers Are Crybabies comments, the Better Team Won comments, and even the dancing at midfield.

But to say the Chargers didn't play carelessly and make bad decisions, all of which directly contributed to your team having an opportunity to win, is silly. You certainly earned the victory with clutch plays in the 4th qtr, but you did not dominate us by any stretch.

And to say that the Pats were ready for Tomlinson, to some how imply that your team stopped him, is equally silly. We ran for 150 yds and got in the endzone on short runs three times. Let's not forget that the Pats D is very strong against the run? They weren't on that day.

Congrats on a great win. And I'm sorry our fans and the players are such whiners. But don't give me this garbage about the Chargers not having a bad day. We all saw it.

 

[SVN]

game tied 21-21
1st and 10 ..tomlinson up the middle for 5 yards
2nd and 5 ..throw to jackson incomplete
3rd and 5 throw to parker incomplete

to be honest i thought they would just run LT on 2nd down because he was going get 3-4 yards for sure..we didnt tackle him for less all day...thats just stupid playcalling..especially when they have 4 mins to milk the clock and get a game winning FG

again good teams take adv of mistakes and pats are good team but chargers just made too many mistakes under pressure IMO

 

[The Predator]

I can handle the trash talking, the LT & Chargers Are Crybabies comments, the Better Team Won comments, and even the dancing at midfield.

But to say the Chargers didn't play carelessly and make bad decisions, all of which directly contributed to your team having an opportunity to win, is silly. You certainly earned the victory with clutch plays in the 4th qtr, but you did not dominate us by any stretch.

And to say that the Pats were ready for Tomlinson, to some how imply that your team stopped him, is equally silly. We ran for 150 yds and got in the endzone on short runs three times. Let's not forget that the Pats D is very strong against the run? They weren't on that day.

Congrats on a great win. And I'm sorry our fans and the players are such whiners. But don't give me this garbage about the Chargers not having a bad day. We all saw it.

Bingo we have Bingo

 

[lander]

game tied 21-21
1st and 10 ..tomlinson up the middle for 5 yards
2nd and 5 ..throw to jackson incomplete
3rd and 5 throw to parker incomplete

to be honest i thought they would just run LT on 2nd down because he was going get 3-4 yards for sure..we didnt tackle him for less all day...thats just stupid playcalling..especially when they have 4 mins to milk the clock and get a game winning FG

again good teams take adv of mistakes and pats are good team but chargers just made too many mistakes under pressure IMO

couldn't agree more.

 

[unoriginal]

Last year we said we lost to Denver because we made a bunch of stupid mistakes.

Now we've beaten the Chargers because we're obviously the superior team?

Let's get our story straight here.

 

[The Predator]

Last year we said we lost to Denver because we made a bunch of stupid mistakes.

Now we've beaten the Chargers because we're obviously the superior team?

Let's get our story straight here.

point well made.

 

[Patters]

Lander, Brady had poor numbers because the Chargers had good D, just as Manning had poor numbers because the Ravens had good D. By the same token, Rivers and Tomlinson were not as effectiveness as they could be because of the Pats D. While carelessness, nervousness and outright incompetence figure into every game, there is a direct correlation between effectiveness of a D and the effectiveness of the opposing O.

I don't think the Chargers (or the Pats for that matter) would have made as many mistakes if it wasn't for quality of the opponent. BB has said that if you force the opponent to make a lot of plays, you increase the chances that they'll make mistakes. I think that makes a lot sense. Almost all football games are games of mistakes. Obviously, the more talented teams make fewer mistakes and the Pats and Chargers were quite even.

Tomlinson nearly broke the Pats and maybe if he had more carries, he would have led the Chargers to victory. On the other hand, while Tomlinson's runs were an important part of the Chargers TDs, they were by no means the major part. The Chargers mostly moved the ball through the air so they naturally stuck with what worked.

If you had followed the Pats over the years (which I doubt you have), you would know that many, many teams have put up great yardage against them, but have still lost. The Pats did a good job with Tomlinson. Though he did get several good runs, he had enough mediocre or poor ones to make your OC think twice when it was third and long.

 

[F0nSY]

We had a lucky day,but we played fine...

 

[Patters]

Last year we said we lost to Denver because we made a bunch of stupid mistakes.

Now we've beaten the Chargers because we're obviously the superior team?

Let's get our story straight here.

Who mentioned Denver? I think most people in this forum would agree that Shanahan knows how to prepare teams against BB and Brady. Last year, the Bronco's did a great job putting pressure on the Pats and getting a lead. As a result of that, we made mistakes, they capitalized, and they won. They were the better team. I'm taking issue with the fact that pundits seem to be saying the Chargers defeated themselves, while I think that the Pats caused them to make mistakes that led to their defeat.

 

[Deus Irae]

Last year we said we lost to Denver because we made a bunch of stupid mistakes.

Now we've beaten the Chargers because we're obviously the superior team?

Let's get our story straight here.

Actually, last year, the officials played an enormous part in the Patriot defeat. This year, the officials sided with San Diego on a face mask penalty that was not enforced, on a challenge that didn't have indisputable evidence, on a receiver absolutely leveling a Patriot DB on a pick play that sprung Gates for his wide open catch, and on several blatant holding calls against the Chargers O-line that weren't called. I'm not saying that was or was not the reason New England lost. I'm merely pointing out a major difference that could legitimately affect perception.

What happened in the Chargers game was an echo of what happened in the Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Marvin Hagler fight. New England went with the punches, defended well and then fired back with enough flurries to win. That's not something extraordinary for this team. Just ask the Rams.

Also, go look at the numbers. For all the talk about San Diego, the only real difference in the game was field position. Yardage numbers and the score were both very close, as was time of possession. What made the game seem as if San Diego was dominating was the field position in the first half, particularly in the first quarter. Had San Diego won the game, the punter would have deserved the MVP.