Next 6 games.

[Triumph]

Arizona and Carolina disagree. Probably the Giants, too.

The Bears? They are most likely better but they need to get a few more wins to move them down the draft order.

The Giants Jones problem is gone. ACL.

New QB rest of the way.

 

[Triumph]

The thread laid out their opportunity and was very accurate. The op, me, didn’t comment on whether they would take advantage of the opportunity or not. Had they beaten the bad teams they would now be 5-4. They didn’t.

Hahaha

Because you are WRONG.

 

[203Pat]

i think this Pats team beats the Panthers. A game vs the Bears would be interesting, NE probably loses but I wouldn’t be shocked if they beat Chicago.

lol we got blown out last year at home and this Patriots team is worse and that Bears team might be slightly better than last years.

 

[patman12]

lol we got blown out last year at home and this Patriots team is worse and that Bears team might be slightly better than last years.

sure, it’s possible but it’s all just hypothetical. Since the Pats are picking top 5 right now, I wouldn’t mind seeing them play teams close but lose the remainder while the other bottom feeders start to win. If they’re going to suck, do it right and grab a couple of franchise players in the top of the early rounds.

 

[patman12]

The Giants Jones problem is gone. ACL.

New QB rest of the way.

Let’s hope they somehow come together and start winning some games.

 

[Ring 6]

Hahaha

Because you are WRONG.

Wrong about what? Exactly what I said in that post is true. If the patriots had beaten those bad teams they would be 5-4 going on 6-4. They would be back in it, tied with buffalo and a game behind Miami. The scenario and opportunity they had was exactly as I laid it out. I was 100% correct.

 

[Triumph]

Let’s hope they somehow come together and start winning some games.

Daboll and the GM are rumored to be terminated soon too which hopefully spurns a winning streak.

 

[Triumph]

Wrong about what? Exactly what I said in that post is true. If the patriots had beaten those bad teams they would be 5-4 going on 6-4. They would be back in it, tied with buffalo and a game behind Miami. The scenario and opportunity they had was exactly as I laid it out. I was 100% correct.

Hilarious

Buffalo (h) and Miami (a) sandwiched in between 4 bad teams; NO, LV, Wash, Indy.

The Saints currently lead the NFCS at 5 - 4. Beat NE
Washington 4 - 5 went down to the wire twice with the Eagles scoring 30 +. Beat NE because Howell is a damn good QB.
Las Vegas 4 - 5 sits at 2nd place in the AFCW. Beat NE.
Indy is 4 - 5. You have been wrong about everything but the Miami game. Youre looking at 1 - 5. That is what I call bad.

With winnable games with LA, Giants, jets, Pitt, Denver still to go, there is a lot of season left.

Do us all favor and curse the Pats (AGAIN) vs these teams by calling them BAD

4 or 5 wins in those 6 games sets them up in decent shape to finish strong.

 

[Triumph]

Wrong about what? Exactly what I said in that post is true. If the patriots had beaten those bad teams they would be 5-4 going on 6-4. They would be back in it, tied with buffalo and a game behind Miami. The scenario and opportunity they had was exactly as I laid it out. I was 100% correct.

And, another thing. You jinxed yourself.

You told me that you have superior football intellect.

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

The thread laid out their opportunity and was very accurate. The op, me, didn’t comment on whether they would take advantage of the opportunity or not. Had they beaten the bad teams they would now be 5-4. They didn’t.

But we are bad lol. It doesn’t matter what they could or didn’t do. We are a very bad team right now.

 

[Ring 6]

But we are bad lol. It doesn’t matter what they could or didn’t do. We are a very bad team right now.

What does that have to do with my post?

 

[Ring 6]

Hilarious

Buffalo (h) and Miami (a) sandwiched in between 4 bad teams; NO, LV, Wash, Indy.

The Saints currently lead the NFCS at 5 - 4. Beat NE
Washington 4 - 5 went down to the wire twice with the Eagles scoring 30 +. Beat NE because Howell is a damn good QB.
Las Vegas 4 - 5 sits at 2nd place in the AFCW. Beat NE.
Indy is 4 - 5. You have been wrong about everything but the Miami game. Youre looking at 1 - 5. That is what I call bad.

With winnable games with LA, Giants, jets, Pitt, Denver still to go, there is a lot of season left.

Do us all favor and curse the Pats (AGAIN) vs these teams by calling them BAD

4 or 5 wins in those 6 games sets them up in decent shape to finish strong.

Thanks for agreeing I was 100% right.

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

What does that have to do with my post?

The point is, it doesn’t matter to me if the Commanders are bad or how these other teams are. We didn’t take care of business because we are bad. We are worse than the Commanders. Also, I wish I was the NO Saints right now which was a “bad team”. They are sitting at 5-4.

 

[Ring 6]

The point is, it doesn’t matter to me if the Commanders are bad or how these other teams are. We didn’t take care of business because we are bad. We are worse than the Commanders. Also, I wish I was the NO Saints right now which was a “bad team”. They are sitting at 5-4.

Why would you tag that to my post about the opportunity that was in front of a 1-3 team?
Whether the patriots ended up 1-16 or 14-3 didn’t change the point of the post. They had the opportunity. Clearly going 1-4 in those games answers the question they are a bad team.

 

[venecol]

Wrong about what? Exactly what I said in that post is true. If the patriots had beaten those bad teams they would be 5-4 going on 6-4. They would be back in it, tied with buffalo and a game behind Miami. The scenario and opportunity they had was exactly as I laid it out. I was 100% correct.

Wrong about the premise of your entire thread. You were trying to counter the (accurate) negative view of the team after starting 1-3, by wishing they could win 4 to 5 of the next 6 games. Nothing you said in that post has come to be true. Nothing. You were 100% wrong.

Buffalo (h) and Miami (a) sandwiched in between 4 bad teams; NO, LV, Wash, Indy.

4 or 5 wins in those 6 games sets them up in decent shape to finish strong.

Your introductory sentence presents as FACT that 4 of the next 6 games are against bad teams. All of those teams are in the running for a WC spot or division win.

Your concluding sentence, premised on the 4 bad teams, implied they could win 4 or 5 of those 6 games. Well, they are 1-4 on those 6 games and 0-3 against the 4 bad teams.

So, you were wrong when:
1. You called them bad teams, and
2. You implied 4 to 5 wins in those 6 games.

The entire premise of your thread unravelled from the get-go when NO put a beat down and shut us out. It just got worse from there.

Of course, being Andy, you claim victory. Lol

That's why so many posters view you as an emotional, angry clown with zero credibility. But hey, keep the laughs coming Andy. You do you. Lol

Sad, emotional Andy:

 

[Ring 6]

Wrong about the premise of your entire thread. You were trying to counter the (accurate) negative view of the team after starting 1-3, by wishing they could win 4 to 5 of the next 6 games. Nothing you said in that post has come to be true. Nothing. You were 100% wrong.



Your introductory sentence presents as FACT that 4 of the next 6 games are against bad teams. All of those teams are in the running for a WC spot or division win.

Your concluding sentence, premised on the 4 bad teams, implied they could win 4 or 5 of those 6 games. Well, they are 1-4 on those 6 games and 0-3 against the 4 bad teams.

So, you were wrong when:
1. You called them bad teams, and
2. You implied 4 to 5 wins in those 6 games.

The entire premise of your thread unravelled from the get-go when NO put a beat down and shut us out. It just got worse from there.

Of course, being Andy, you claim victory. Lol

That's why so many posters view you as an emotional, angry clown with zero credibility. But hey, keep the laughs coming Andy. You do you. Lol

Sad, emotional Andy:
View attachment 54395

The premise of my thread was the opportunity they had to turn the season around. You inventing a meaning that isn’t there doesn’t change that.

They were bad teams. I did not imply they would win those games at all, I stated that the level they needed to play at the get back in track wasn’t very high.

It’s funny how you project your emotional immaturity on others.
I make a post about the schedule the team is facing and you get all uptight an emotional and can’t stop posting in the thread.

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

NO isn’t a bad team. 5-4. They aren’t great but there’s a chance for playoffs tho the division isn’t great. They are average. LV without Mcdaniels looks like a different team but could be a one off.

 

[Ring 6]

NO isn’t a bad team. 5-4. They aren’t great but there’s a chance for playoffs tho the division isn’t great. They are average. LV without Mcdaniels looks like a different team but could be a one off.

They are the beneficiary of an easy schedule.
They have 5 wins against teams that are a combine 12-31 and are 0-4 against teams with a combined 16-16. They have played 1 team with a winning record.
Average is probably a stretch but they have beaten some bad teams.

 

[BritPat]

Saints have a very good and vastly under-rated D.
Raiders have Josh at the helm who knows us inside out.
Redskins have an unbelievable front 4 and some outstanding receivers.
Justin freakin' Fields kicked our asses at home last year. Richardson looks better than he does as a QB.

We can cry and whine about injuries, untested rookies etc, but I don't see the likes of the Cardinals and Rams making excuses, they're playing their asses off.

Three out four so far. No Richardson for the Colts however Minshew's playing well, they too have some good receivers in Pittman and Downs, along with Taylor and Moss in the run game. Another L, this time in front of an international audience.

Wunderbar.