I hope we lose opening day

[Disco Volante]

I think he wants the old under the radar team that few talk about,The kind of team that is not playing poorly but not seen as unstoppable either,The OP IMO wants a team that wins consistently but is no standout but at the same time is well into contention and he wants maybe an early loss to keep the team under media wrath or attention.

AKA the 2007 Indianapolis Colts.

Things worked out cute for them.

 

[Lifer]

Explain to me what about those four loses in 04 that makes that year so good. Yes obviously I will take 12-4 and a SB win anyday but the 4 loses have nothing to do with it. 12-4 with a SB is better than 18-1 without a SB no questions asked but its not like the 4 loses helped them win the SB.

The statement you should make is that if we lose it will not bug me as much as it used to because at least we wont have to hear all the undefeated talk. Personally I would love to hear the talk again because that would mean we are that good again.

fine,
if we lose it will not bug me as much as it used to because at least we wont have to hear all the undefeated talk.

you people jump on the littlest things like a bunch of women..you should work in the Hillary Clinton campaign. :singing:

didnt mean to offend the sensibilities of the everything is perfect world of Patriot Nation. Fact is, 2004's 14-2 season was better than this years 16-0 season. Because it ended with a Super Bowl win. Whatever the reasons, and maybe it was the pressures of going 16-0, this team got worse as the season went on, as opposed to most BB teams, that get better in December and January. The 2007 Patriots could never have held the top offensive team in football to 3 points ( as the 2004 team did) and score 41 points on the top defensive team ( as the 2004 team did).

so my point is, get a stupid loss out of the way early, go 14-2, get mentally stronger and get ready to kick butt in the playoffs and stop worrying about TD records and 19-0 and greatest team ever garbage.

is that too hard to fathom? sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh

 

[Disco Volante]

But your assuming that the pressure had something to do with us eventually losing.

 

[Mack Herron]

Maybe you root for us to lose every game. That way there would be no false hopes whatsoever. No letdowns.

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

Great read...

for the Record...I hope the Pats lose on opening Day too...

but then again...I'm a Steelers fan

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

Joking aside, I can understand this posters point...not wanting the "pressure" of another "undefeated talk" season.

All of us as fans, want our teams to win every game and be 19-0 every year. You guys had that shot for real...and it must have been an amazing experience as a fan...

I know I'd have lost my mind dealing with that especially come weeks 16, 17 and into the playoffs...After that Colts win in 07, I was so sure, they'd actually do it...then the Eagles, Ravens, Giants...Pats always found a way to pull it out...it must have been an amazing ride...

 

[Lifer]

But your assuming that the pressure had something to do with us eventually losing.

Do you have any evidence it didnt? Could the Super Bowl have turned out any worse?
Do you know it didnt wear them down mentally as the season progressed, that it didnt effect how they prepared, how they approached everything?

did this team look the same to you in December and January and February than they did in Sept, Oct and Nov?

whatever it was, they just werent a great team toward the end. And that is very un-Patriot like.

all im saying, is even before the loss, I enjoyed the stretch run of 2004 better because that team was playing great at the end and not just holding on to history as the 2007 Patriots seemed to be doing.

the AFCCG against the Chargers? That performance vs what the 2004 team did at Pittsburgh? or compare the win over the Jags vs the 2004 win against the Colts. Which team was playing at its best and which team was barely making it across the finish line as all the media scutinized evey move they made?

I could say, gosh gee, the 2008 Patriots are going to go 19-0 and all is wonderful....but the truth is, my Patriots dont HAVE to be 19-0 for me to love them. I loved them when they were 1-15, and Im not the one acting like the world will end if they lose a game, you guys are.

so who is being a real fan? truthfully saying that for me, i;ll enjoy a 14-2 or 12-4 just as much, or one of you guys who will die if they ever break your heart and lose.

sorry i said something so blasphemous as to imply i would love the Patriots even if they lost opening day, and would in fact, prefer it, if it would spare them, and us, the best ever idiocy we had to go through, which did indeed effect the teams performance, and which ruined the pure joy of having just gone to a Super Bowl.

 

[tobias funke]

There are a dozen "real" reasons why the Patriots were outplayed in the Super Bowl.

And none of it had to do with the pressure.

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

There are a dozen "real" reasons why the Patriots were outplayed in the Super Bowl.

And none of it had to do with the pressure.

well...D Line pressure more than anything...

 

[Lifer]

There are a dozen "real" reasons why the Patriots were outplayed in the Super Bowl.

And none of it had to do with the pressure.

how do you know?

they had 2 weeks to prepare. Best coach in football. Could the results have been any worse?

why did their performance decline the second half of the season? That had never happened to Bill Belichick coached Patriot team before.

You explain it.

 

[Lifer]

well...D Line pressure more than anything...

suddenly the 2007 Giants are the 1974 Steelers.

Patriot fans cant bear to think it had anything to do with the stress and pressure of trying to be perfect. So the other team must become AWESOME.

how does that explain declining performance over the second half of the season against everybody?

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

Injuries, more tape on how to attack their offense, jam at the line, double over moss, use inside stunts on the center guard to cause confusion for Brady, new looks he's never seen on any Giants film, a great defensive attack and a miracle play to give the Giants a key first down.

Defense was banged up, guys were worn out a little, Brady played hurt, O Coordinator for the Pats didn't go to a double TE set like maybe he could have in spots during that game when it was obvious the Giants D Line was giving zero attention to the running game.

Maybe they felt pressure, but the Giants were in the Superbowl just the same as the Pats, and in the Superbowl, both teams are 0-0. Pressure may have been on the Pats as the favorite but Strahan, felt pressure, he'd been there before, Eli, oh man you know he felt the pressure of the NY Media and Fan Base if he "screwed it up".

Gameplan and on the field performance more than anything else.

 

[Lifer]

Injuries, more tape on how to attack their offense, jam at the line, double over moss, use inside stunts on the center guard to cause confusion for Brady, new looks he's never seen on any Giants film, a great defensive attack and a miracle play to give the Giants a key first down.

Defense was banged up, guys were worn out a little, Brady played hurt, O Coordinator for the Pats didn't go to a double TE set like maybe he could have in spots during that game when it was obvious the Giants D Line was giving zero attention to the running game.

Maybe they felt pressure, but the Giants were in the Superbowl just the same as the Pats, and in the Superbowl, both teams are 0-0. Pressure may have been on the Pats as the favorite but Strahan, felt pressure, he'd been there before, Eli, oh man you know he felt the pressure of the NY Media and Fan Base if he "screwed it up".

Gameplan and on the field performance more than anything else.

exactly, and the Giants came up with the plays when they had to. They handled the pressure. Just like the 2001, 2003, and 2004 Patriots handled the pressure. This team did not.

as far as "defense banged up, Brady was hurt etc etc...all part of the game and no different from any other year. Just proved the team wasnt good enough, especially on defense.

proves my point. either it means the 2004 team was better, or this team choked. I dont think they choked, but the pressure wore on them, distracted them, tired them out, its the only explanation as to why their play went downhill as the season wore on.

of course you never want to lose, but maybe when they do have that loss in October, we can keep it in perspective and not get all depressed about it.

did the Halloween Night loss at Pittsburgh in 2004 keep the Patriots from winning it all? No. So people, dont sweat it if they lose the game of the century against the Colts in week 8.


so which is it Patriot Nation? did the pressure of the *19-0 season get to them, or were they just not good enough to be champions, like the 2004 team?

 

[tobias funke]

suddenly the 2007 Giants are the 1974 Steelers.

Patriot fans cant bear to think it had anything to do with the stress and pressure of trying to be perfect. So the other team must become AWESOME.

how does that explain declining performance over the second half of the season against everybody?

The real question is not why isn't everyone so quick to agree with you.

It's why is it so easy for you to dismiss the dozens of real reasons, based in fact and directly linkable to poor performance, that others propose.

They make much more sense than your theory, which is completely intangible, unprovable, and rooted in your incredible similarity to a chicken.

This is football. Grow up.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I didn't read this whole thread because it's a bonehead premise, so if somebody has actually reduced it to its inherent logical fallacy (a pretty obvious exercise,) I apologize for re-stating the obvious.

The premise seems to be this:

The Patriots went 18-0 prior to the Super Bowl.

The Patriots (the Belichick Patriots) had never lost a Super Bowl.

The Patriots never were 18-0 before.

The Patriots lost this Super Bowl.

Therefore, going 18-0 caused the loss of the Super Bowl.

The difficulty is that going 18-0 is a necessary but not sufficient condition for going 18-1. It is also, however, a necessary but not sufficient condition for going 19-0.

If we are 15-0 in 2008 (we should be so lucky, soft schedule or no,) I am not rooting for a loss in week 16.

Buncha defeatist crapola. By the way if I got all emotional at some point and said the same thing, it was still defeatist crapola (but I don't think I did.)

PFnV

 

[Lifer]

The real question is not why isn't everyone so quick to agree with you.

It's why is it so easy for you to dismiss the dozens of real reasons, based in fact and directly linkable to poor performance, that others propose.

They make much more sense than your theory, which is completely intangible, unprovable, and rooted in your incredible similarity to a chicken.

This is football. Grow up.

so, the key is...how many people agree with a point? Maybe they have their head in the clouds and cant deal with the fact the 2007 NY Giants werent a great team.

Our team wasnt mentally tough enough.. But thats ok because no other team in NFL history has been mentally tough enough to go 19-0. Its not an indictment of the Patriots, its a comment that the pressure of going 19-0 is too much for any team, thats why it has not been done.
And i for one, dont want them to go through that.

would you rather they go 18-0 and lose the Super Bowl or be 17-1 and win it. that is my point. why many of you cant grasp that is beyond me,

This is football. Grow up. is that what you say when you have no more points to make? You need to grow up, our team lost at the wrong time, and will remembered forever as such.

deal with it.

 

[tobias funke]

Maybe they have their head in the clouds and cant deal with the fact the 2007 NY Giants werent a great team.

This is the most ironic and hilarious thing you could have posted.

You are not a Patriot fan.

 

[Lifer]

I didn't read this whole thread because it's a bonehead premise, so if somebody has actually reduced it to its inherent logical fallacy (a pretty obvious exercise,) I apologize for re-stating the obvious.

The premise seems to be this:

The Patriots went 18-0 prior to the Super Bowl.

The Patriots (the Belichick Patriots) had never lost a Super Bowl.

The Patriots never were 18-0 before.

The Patriots lost this Super Bowl.

Therefore, going 18-0 caused the loss of the Super Bowl.

The difficulty is that going 18-0 is a necessary but not sufficient condition for going 18-1. It is also, however, a necessary but not sufficient condition for going 19-0.

If we are 15-0 in 2008 (we should be so lucky, soft schedule or no,) I am not rooting for a loss in week 16.

Buncha defeatist crapola. By the way if I got all emotional at some point and said the same thing, it was still defeatist crapola (but I don't think I did.)

PFnV

so if they went 15-0, then lost to go 15-1, then won 3 straight to win the Super Bowl..would that be better than going 18-0, then losing the Super Bowl?

I wouldnt want them to lose in week 16 either because its near the end of the season and i want them peaking then.

But did the opening day loss in 2003 hurt the Patriots in ANY way?

which season turned out better and more enjoyable. 2003 or 2007.

Id take 2003 anyday. 15 straight wins without the "crapola"

thank you. out.

 

[Lifer]

This is the most ironic and hilarious thing you could have posted.

You are not a Patriot fan.

excuse me, you believe the 2007 Giants were a GREAT team?

You are not a football fan. Next you will tell me Eli Manning is Johnny Unitas.

 

[tobias funke]

excuse me, you believe the 2007 Giants were a GREAT team?

You are not a football fan. Next you will tell me Eli Manning is Johnny Unitas.

They were great enough to win 3 tough playoff games on the road and then beat the 2007 Patriots.

Football games are won in 60 minutes between the lines. That's how you figure out who is better.

That is Patriot football.